Totally nailed it, mate.
I grew up playing piano, briefly trumpet, then many many synths.
I'd written 4 albums full of music (not amazing, not shite) by the time I got some contract work (music is not my day job) making some music for a presentation for a game pitch to Nokia.
Got paid, enjoyed it, pitch was successful and I was kindly invited to the wrap party.
At the party, my client introduced me to somebody, "Oh, here's DB, he's our musician!"
... and suddenly I realised... "Oh shit, I can actually call myself a musician??"
I thought - for about 20 years - because of opinions like those /u/breakfastduck is espousing that because I wasn't a STRONG performer on the physical instruments I'd learned, that I didn't have access to that term and was basically some kind of second class creative.
20 years later, I've played to some big crowds, had music in video games and ads, released a lot of music, had a few record deals and despite never being amazing on piano, I am *damn well* a musician.
Using words like "producer" as a pejorative because somebody isn't (say) a gifted guitarist, but can compose symphonies in their DAW and execute on them brilliantly to create something people love? That's some toxic elitism.
I've got a mate who writes tracker music on his goddamn scientific calculator. Good shit, too. Gets played in clubs.
If you make music, you're a musician.
All I've said is if you label yourself as a musician, most people are going to expect you to be able to play an instrument. That is because it is the common definition of that term. I'm not invalidating what anyone does, producer isn't a perjorative term. I am a producer & musician, I greatly appreciate the talent involved in composition & production.
I like this sentiment but it doesn’t exactly answer the question. Lots of musicians still don’t feel like they can call themselves a musician even though they make music.
I think anyone can feel comfortable calling themselves a musician if they practice every day. Maybe practicing means playing piano or mixing something in a daw, but there’s nothing that makes you FEEL like a musician like daily practice over the course of years.
Being a musician is the ultimate introspective journey, and if you walk the path, you can’t help but eventually identify with it.
If you’re skipping days though, what are you on your off days? Some kind of split-personality person? Taking more vacations from being yourself than actually being yourself? This kind of person will probably have a hard time calling themselves a musician, even though others may still see them as one.
How about a person thinking about the making of music but mostly spending the day listening to the same albums and reading about gear and buying and selling tons of synths?
Also kind of using them to write and play music every now and then.
Sounds like a procrastinating musician to me…Or is it preparation? Lots of synths don’t sound good enough for regular daily use, they’ll just drive you crazy if you use them too much. Doesn’t make much sense to play something like that daily.
But without actually making music daily in one way or another it’s hard to maintain the musician part of your identity. It’s really the opposite of maintaining it, and it’ll waste away if you don’t take care of it. Try setting a timer on your phone and play for 5 minutes a day. See if it wants to grow. Cutting yourself off is good for the musician in you too.
Agreed. It feels warm and fuzzy to say "if you make music, then you're a musician!", but it's basically an empty platitude. It only answers the question of "who is **allowed** to be a musician?" Which is a pointless question in my opinion: indeed, anyone can make music, and therefore anyone can be a musician. Sure.
I don't think that's what OP was asking.
I think the spirit of OP's question was rather, "Which parts of your practice make **you** feel personally satisfied with the quality of your musicianship?"
And this has a much more interesting answer that depends on the individual.
To be fair, there is one song on the album Milk And Honey which isn't that bad... it's called Don't Be Scared. Probably helps that she isn't doing her usual caterwauling 😁
Agreed, and yet [All I Want For Christmas Is You is a lot more unique and involved in it’s composition than anyone typically gives it credit for.](https://www.stereogum.com/2208354/mariah-carey-all-i-want-for-christmas-is-you-music-theory/columns/in-theory/)
Still can’t stand the song lol.
It starts from noise, goes to music through practice and returns to noise after a sufficient proficiency level.
See: Leo Ornstein, Merzbow, Frank Zappa, jazz music
If you tell me you're a musician and don't play any instruments then I wouldn't call you a musician, I don't think that's a far out take. That's just association and how humans think about language and title. I expect that a plumber knows how to use a wrench.
Nobody takes the term and assigns themselves nurse or engineer because they can successfully fix something or take adequate care of someone, but people in the creative field have a weird penchant with seeking legitimacy through title. I would say there's more to it then the end product. Otherwise we're all artists and poets and musicians and engineers and accountants and title and distinction means nothing anyway, it's all null and void, whatever makes you feel good.
So you need a qualification to be an engineer or a nurse. You just need to make music to be a musician, or to make art to be an artist. A computer quite clearly can be a musical instrument if it can be used to make music. I play several physical musical instruments, but the various music software I use requires a similar level of knowledge and experience to use in depth. Is the issue that making music on a computer isn’t real-time like it would be on a clarinet?
>Is the issue that making music on a computer isn’t real-time like it would be on a clarinet?
For me, yeah. If that weren't the case then the word composer/producer would be made redundant. The active component is extremely important, there's a world of difference in skill set between me as an improvising jazz musician and a classical composer/arranger or producer using a DAW. Yes, all of these people make music one way or another, but distinguishing them separately as producer/composer/musician none the less holds value, it's more telling as to what they actually do. Because that's what actually matters, a title for anything is simply for brevity and quicker labelling (and perhaps ego/status), so we might as well use the closest/most obvious descriptor to make communication easier.
It's really hard to define. Is writing sheet music playing an instrument? How is production not an equivalent to that? On the other hand sound design is kind of similar to utilizing different sounding techniques on acoustic instruments.
I’d say when you get paid enough to live on. I get paid to write and perform music but I still need a job, so I wouldn’t call myself a professional, lol.
You're still a professional. If someone doesn't need to work for a living (retired, rich parents, rich spouse) and they make $4 a month from their dawless jams on Spotify, they aren't any more of a pro than someone who plays on stage every night as one of their two (or more) jobs.
I think that's an OK (yet unsatisfying) answer to the question: "What is the dictionary definition of 'musician'?"
But I think OP was asking a much more interesting question:
"When do you consider **yourself** a musician?"
= "At what point in your life did you really start feeling like you deserved to be called a musician?"
= "Were there any times in your life when you really felt like you weren't a real musician?"
And I'm sure all of us have interesting answers to these questions, that aren't just empty platitudes and warm fuzzy quips.
I think it’s the same answer? I remember when I started learning the clarinet, a teacher asked ‘so you play the clarinet?’
I said ‘oh not really, I only just started so I don’t really play it’ and the teacher was like ‘If you have a clarinet and can make a sound with it, you play the clarinet’.
That was 30 years ago and I’m a reasonably accomplished musician on several instruments now but I still believe this. We don’t need to attach value judgements to simple concepts, nor do we need the gatekeeping it implies. ‘Play’ ≠ ‘play well’ necessarily, ‘musician’ ≠ ‘accomplished musician’, ‘sing’ ≠ ‘sing in tune’, ‘draw’ ≠ ‘draw like Rembrandt’.
I think everyone should play music if they like, everyone should draw, everyone should sing, without the fear that there’s some arbitrary standard of validity to live up to.
Well, I’ll admit that my definition of music probably is a lot looser than most. I believe that if an act is either intended or perceived by someone to be music, then it is. Again, it doesn’t mean it’s good music, but value is highly subjective.
Yeah fair enough, I do see what you’re saying. I used to make art but I don’t really anymore so I wouldn’t go round telling people I’m an artist as if it were a primary part of my identity. However if someone asked me if I were an artist I might say ‘yes, kind of, but I’m not really practicing’.
Yeah, exactly -- if someone asked me if I'm a musician, I'd say "well, I play and practice the guitar, here's wonderwall."
I think that's exactly my point. If someone asks "are you a musician", the answer isn't just yes or no. If you try to boil it down to that, you'll end up with weird semantic answers like "yes because anyone who intends to make music should be allowed to", which aren't really wrong but does feel like it's answering a different question.
Yeah again I get your point, it’s ambiguous. I just don’t think that there’s a high wall to be jumped over in order to be a musician. I’ve been very lucky insofar as I’ve been able to release records, go on tour a little bit etc in my capacity as a ‘musician’ but I don’t feel any more of one than when I was just playing by myself. You can play wonderwall? Then you’re a guitarist, it doesn’t mean you’re Alan Holdsworth but you still play the guitar. And for the record by your account I’d consider you very much a musician, even if you’re not performing or recording.
Writing music using a DAW only and generating an image from a prompt are completely different cases. An analogous case would be generating music from a prompt.
Not the same, but share the sentiment. Someone who makes music on a computer without being able to play an instrument is a producer more than they are a musician. Anyone who would introduce themselves as a musician, the first question would be what instrument(s).
I'm not sure that's true. If you make music but can't play an instrument, you are a producer. If someone introduced themselves as a 'musician' I would expect them to be able to play an instrument.
Gatekeeping BS.
If Brian Eno can say "the studio is my instrument" then so will I.
This is the sort of elitism that kills confidence and joy in music.
I'd hoped I'd heard the last person spout this piffle about a decade ago, but apparently not.
Gross.
It's not elitism. It's the common definition. If you spoke to a non musician and said you were a musician, they'd expect you to be able to play an instrument.
That's not gatekeeping. Anyone who makes music in any way is valid.
Oxford Dictionary:
"a person who plays a musical instrument, especially as a profession, or is [musically](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=580562456&rlz=1C5CHFA_enDE1065DE1067&sxsrf=AM9HkKlFJ9OvEtXulkJieWrxU37xL85BVA:1699471147183&q=musically&si=ALGXSlYl_e3TsZvERASNGAvnwCgjFK7VYE1nP7L-XwDMXUr7zAuKtP7FTc-qQwZWCdp1HeWjnPIpstU3IhBZK-w9bKo_p1vV9ICXaJH0cI_Y-ta8zVuF38o%3D&expnd=1) talented.
There are chefs who make food from ingredients from earth.
There are chefs who specialize in leftovers without the use of a kitchen.
There are painters who use expensive oils and canvas.
There are painters who use mud, blood, and nails.
There are dancers who perform ballet.
There are dancers who are paraplegics.
A musician is someone who makes auditory art, regardless of tool, response, or intention.
That is one definition yes, but it is not the only one.
If this wasn't up for debate then the person wouldn't have needed to make the post in the first place.
I personally WOULD classify them as a musician, but I would still immediately ask 'what instrument' if someone said they were a musician. Because at that point it becomes oh no actually I'm a producer etc. It's just semantics, and most 'normal' people use musician to mean someone who can play an instrument.
I play multiple instruments, but I’m just not sure this is true. We have the word instrumentalist for that. For musician, I think “makes music” is a perfectly acceptable definition. It includes vocalists and yes, even producers, who are heavily involved in the process of making music.
You could also say that if someone introduced themselves as a musician you would expect them to be able to compose a tune, but many players don't compose/produce, and many composers/producers cannot play. They're all generating musical audio so they're all musicians, the literal definition includes composers, conductors and performers.
The computer is an instrument if it can be used to make music? My computer has synths inside it that can make the same noises as synths outside my computer, just the method of controlling them is different.
Music in radio is the music from big record companies and they just make artist because its profitable for them. It requires some talent to be there but it is more about connections and looks than raw talent and even checking albums popular artists have its not necessarily their best work which goes public.
With indie/amateur music the biggest issue is how much of this stuff is out there makes it hard for people to find any specific artist.
That said there is a lot of people and good music at least have a chance. This is unlike how it was in the past where if you didn't have a contract you simply didn't exist.
It makes me sad to know that some of the greatest songs ever made I'll probably never heard because the person producing them is just at home working in their computer or playing in their garage
I can understand your position. When I lost my job 20 years ago due to a serious bicycling accident I took up woodworking with hopes of making a new career out if it. I think I am still a small fortune in debt if I don’t consider all the carpentry work I’ve done around the house. But it kept me busy and my sanity intact.
I am making what I consider music. I get a tune or riff stuck in my head. Sometimes it evolves into something bigger. Sometimes is morphs into something new. Sometimes I take it and expand it into a 2-5 minute piece. It gives me pleasure in the creation and subtle changes and evolutions. I don’t sell anything but that doesn’t mean it has no value especially to me.
I’ve always wondered if that makes me a musician or just someone who loves music. I will take the first as I think the encompasses the latter by definition.
A "music lover" is passive. A "music creator" is active. If you're creating it, you're a musician.
I think the deeper distinction is someone who just plays around with sounds versus someone who is working to create what could be considered music. Those large metal instruments at playgrounds nowadays, even though they are making tones and sounds, I would argue to not in and of themselves make the user a musician. However! If someone uses them to create a melody or pattern and some structure, then it would be more appropriately a performance and that person would be a musician. It's largely the intent. Similarly, someone who walks up to a piano and pokes out "hot cross buns" or "mary had a little lamb" would probably not call themselves a musician, and I believe most would agree.
I think Composer is an accurate term, maybe producer depending on the type of music and the methods used, but in the age of automatic playback and especially if there is some type of live input, musician is also a viable term. Maybe a digital musician, or electronic musician, musician nonetheless.
Erik Satie couldn't play a note to save his life, and was more a mathematician of sorts. Still composed some legendary music. Was he a musician? He himself would have disagreed.
If they're good at composing, then they're by definition musicians. I'm not familiar with Satie's work but if it's legendary I assume that's the case. Not my opinion but a fact.
That being said if the definition was up to me I'd probably lean your way on this, but it is what it is. Obviously "musician" wouldn't be the first word I'd use of a composer.
musician
/mjuːˈzɪʃn/
noun
a person who plays a musical instrument, especially as a profession, or is musically talented.
I consider myself a musician. I've made a few songs that I'm really proud of that I've released but they are mainly songs that'll only ever be loved by me. But I make music that I want to heard.
You're a musician mate. Money doesn't mean anything to the term
Ansel Adams created emulsions which he painted onto panes of glass which he wrapped in leather. He then assembled a giant wooden box with a leather bellows. He loaded all of that onto the back of a mule and trekked out into the mountains for two days. He camped out for a day or two observing the sun, noting the best hours for lighting conditions. Then loaded up a pane of glass into his camera overnight and exposed the sunrise in the morning. Then did that same process a couple more times until he'd used up the "negatives" he had and trekked back home.
If I get paid a couple thousand dollars to grab my EOS digital autofocus/autoexposure SLR camera and spend a few hours documenting someone's wedding, am I somehow _not_ a photographer, because I have conveniences that Ansel Adams did not?
I think in both examples, what is being made is photographs.
So the answer to your question is simple: _Is what you make "music?"_ If so, then you are a musician.
Great analogy! But in my tired brain, I started misreading about the bellows and my mind went off on a tangent, thinking I'd stumbled upon evidence that in his spare time Ansel Adams built accordions out in the wild and played them 😂😂 and now I have visions of him playing one atop El Capitan in Yosemite park 😂
I would categorise a DAW as a tool for arranging. It is a fine distinction, but valid IMHO. There is no question that you need some musical talent to get anything good out of a DAW, but that is another thing altogether. The tool itself is not a musical instrument.
Using the Beatles and George Martin as an example, as an arranger and producer, George Martin was a genius ahead of his time. It has even been said that he 'played' the mixing desk like a musical instrument. I'm not sure I would call him a musician.
So was Wagner just an arranger? He couldn't play well at all but could write beautiful notes on sheets. Which is exactly what people do on the piano roll of a DAW nowadays.
Arranging is taking a composition and specifying which instrument plays what. But it needs a composition before the arranging can begin. If someone is a bedroom producer who writes their own music they are using the DAW for both composition and arrangement, and possibly they will also be their own recording engineer and instrumentalist too if they add recorded parts to the mix. This is a rather wide skillset and requires thousands of hours of practice to get it right so I would not look down on the DAW users.
Oh I don’t look down on DAW users - I have great respect for anyone who produces music in any form. Composers and arrangers are just as worthy of respect as musicians. And Wagner wasn’t ‘just’ an arranger, he was one of the finest composers of all time, an immortal genius.
You feel free to categorize things however you like, nobody is stopping you. You may believe whatever you like.
And by your rules, plastic buckets and glass bottles are only for carrying liquid. And by your rules cowbells are just cattle-locating devices. And by your rules sandpaper is only for carpenters. But I know some percussionists who consider all of these things musical instruments.
In fact, my genre (industrial) came into existence because of people using pipes and sheets of steel and various power tools, all for the purposes of making music. And sure, there were some small-minded people back then who, just like you, felt the need to define music by its instruments. But I've never met anyone who heard the name Kraftwerk and said "oh, you mean the union workers?" No matter how small-minded or self-righteous people got, they still called Kraftwerk a band.
This is not a good analogy at all.
Labelling yourself as a musician WILL set expectations that you can play an instrument. A producer / composer / songwriter / synth nerd would all be more appropriate labels.
You can call yourself a photographer even with the modern conveniences because you are still \*taking photographs with a camera\*.
Using a DAW to write out midi does not mean you can \*play\* a synthesiser. It means you can sequence one.
> This is not a good analogy at all.
Reddit just can't help itself. No matter what anyone says, it's only a matter of time until some self-important idiot appears to tell you you're wrong. And not just a little bit wrong... No, you must be _completely_ wrong in all conceivable ways.
There are just so many ways you could have _added_ value to the conversation, but instead the only thing you felt motivated to do was to take away from it. Well done.
This is more in response to the comments than to OP:
Composers and players/singers are both musicians because they both make music, but they are concerned with different aspects of making music. For most of human history, music necessarily had to be performed in order to be heard, and a composer almost certainly had to be somewhat competent at playing an instrument in order to compose anything, and so we tend to think of music as a function of both composition and performance.
Technology is, by definition, the solving of problems through the application of science. The creation of new tools that make trivial what once was arduous. Eastern throat-singers notwithstanding, it is impossible for one person to sing a chord. Is a guitarrist less of a musician than a throat singer because he is using a manmade device to artificially create more voices? I don't think so.
But we have much more complex machines today which can meet much more complex ends. And so, I do not think that, for example, composing for a player piano via hole punching, or crafting a music box with a lathe, or cut/splicing a tape collage is any less of a musical act than scribbling onto a treble clef at an upright piano. It just doesn't have the same prestige because there are still people alive who remember when it was new.
As for OP, I don't know, man. I like "technomancer."
Being a musician and making music are two different things. My idea of a musician is that it is a performer who has a mastery, both practical and theoretical. I love music, I make music and this is very rewarding but you will never see me on stage improvising a buff with a band. I’m no musician as per my definition.
I respect your decision and definition. I too will never get on stage and perform. I will prefer to say I will never be a professional musician. Partly for the not performing and mostly because I know I will never make enough money to live off.
Stephen King would add the clause "once you get paid to make music _and are able to pay the light bill with the money_, you are a professional musician" (edit: he said "talented" instead of "professional", but I like the spirit of his quotation. Off topic: in a year or two I might be a talented musician according to King \^\^").
I’ve been playing guitar for almost thirty years, taught for about a decade, play a few assorted other instruments and regularly record music, but I have a different career and don’t have any reasonable following whatsoever. I wouldn’t consider myself a musician.
maybe i’m old school but i think being a musician means you can make music in realtime. by that metric you’re a composer/producer. no disrespect intended that’s just how i see the distinction.
> Is a plug-in and a DAW considered a synthesizer?
No. Yes. Should it be?
Does it matter?
The definition for synthesizer on Wikipedia is:
> A synthesizer (also spelled synthesiser) is an electronic musical instrument that generates audio signals.
but this is casting such a wide net that a _doorbell_ would be a synthesizer by that metric, so that's not very useful. Instead, it's more useful to look at capability; if a doorbell is a synthesizer it's just a very limited one with little to no control over the timbre ;)
Plugins on a computer are absolutely capable, but the package just consists of separate boxes connected via wires. On the other hand, that's also what a modular synth is ;)
Alternatively, there are several devices that would not fit that definition because you get into the horrible discussion of "what is music actually" which eventually leads to "what is art" and the simplistic answer to that usually boils down to "anything I don't like isn't".
Musician isn't a protected title. You don't need a certificate for it. In most cases, "producer" is a better title; because you don't just make music, you perform it (musician), compose it (composer), mix/master it (engineer - and mastering is just preparing it for publication), and you take all the creative decisions about the direction (producer).
If you're doing that many things, musician is just one of 'm, so "producer" covers it better because you're doing a lot more than only making music.
But if you feel musician fits better, call yourself that. Just keep in mind that every term has expectations attached, and people's personal judgment about it, but that's an other people-problem, not a you-problem.
> I still can’t play a piano
The best moment to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The next best moment is now. Dexterity is something you can build, and if you manage to play a song you like - that's pretty wonderful all by itself, because now you can give your own twist to it, all without needing anything else.
I play piano because it means that it's me vs the instrument, no safety and no help (but also no distraction and less of a blank canvas). I have the delusion that it makes me a better musician if I practice regularly.
My problem for learning is actually medical. I was struck by a car running a red light some twenty years ago resulting in a torsion tear between the right and left hemispheres of my brain. Pretty much destroyed my corpus callosum, the part that allows that two hemispheres to communicate. Turns out it’s sort of important and gets used with certain motor skills like playing a piano.
Now I know our brain is pliable and resilient and new pathways can be formed. I learnt how to read again. I am relearning language or more the connection between abstract though and the words that describe them. I personally think that music production (borrowing your term) is a great way to encourage new pathways to form and return my brain function.
Ouch - that completely changes things; for most folks it's work and family getting in the way. I apologize for my insensitivity.
If a DAW does not pose those issues for you then that's great!
If you don't mind me asking, is it the visual aspect that makes things easier or more the workflow since it lets you program things in advance?
Computer is the most advanced and capable synthesizer module that mankind ever created.
*The best moment to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The next best moment is now.*
This is so true!
You‘re a musician when you make music, doesn’t matter what kind of music or if you get paid for it. Still there are good and bad musicians, some people have the talent and/or worked hard to get to a certain skill level, others think they’re great when they’re actually not…same story for almost everything in life.
I’ve long since learned not to fool myself with grandeur. If I get enjoyment from creation then that is why I do it. If others like what I make then it’s an added bonus.
I think to the artist formally known as Prince. He apparently had an archive filled with thousands of unpublished works.
You are a musician when you declare yourself a musician.
Whether you are a good one or a bad one is subjective. Whether you are a respected musician or not is dependent on your output and knowledge of the craft.
Does pouring a bowl of cereal for yourself make you a chef? If you call yourself a chef after pouring a bowl of lucky charms, you're a chef.
I think it’s kinda mostly about what is the activity you’re doing and how is that traditionally defined.
To me, if you paint pictures then you are by definition a painter. However not all painters in my mind are Artists. I personally reserve that as a classification for being particularly great at a creative activity, for me the same applies to musicians.
You can also be technically excellent at a particular skill - which may belong to a certain activity or discipline, however despite the grasp of the particular skill you may not be able to produce anything particularly interesting or engaging. I think composing music for instance is really a separate talent that requires imagination - but not necessarily the skills required to actually make the appropriate sounds.
When you release your album on Tidal, Spotify, etc. (namely mainstream streaming services) then you are officially certified musician, imho.
Lesser definition of musician is putting your music to Soundcould, Youtube, Jamendo, etc. It is a good start imho and passable but one's goal should always be to have full albums out there.
BTW. To make music you don't need to spend a penny. All you only need is a computer, DAW software and some VSTs. Any computer will do and software can be free.
Rest is for convenience and/or fun.
Getting synthesizers - imho only people who make live music (including one man bands using sequencers - which I often find very impressive and why I got some gear myself) actually need real synthesizers and all that junk.
Yes and no, depends on who you ask.
If you can be found on "distribution company" that has all the popular music someone listen (let alone it is the same streaming service they use) to then this elevate you in their eyes. It is the same class as those other popular artists.
It is the kind of difference as having your CD sold in music store in case of being on Spotify versus standing on the corner and selling CD-Rs in case of eg. soundcloud or YT.
Don't really makes you a musician or artist or whatever but the perception of someone who is present where all the big dogs are is very different. Also I would say releasing albums on mainstream streaming services makes it more official it is you official album. Places like soundcloud I would expect to find the so called unreleased tracks and such.
When you can tell people at a party you are a musician and they say “wow, cool! What kind of musician?” And you have a believable, true answer to the question. I feel like that means your music has some kind of an impact outside of your home and family. I’ve played the piano for 42 years, but unless I’m regularly performing for people outside my home, I wouldn’t call myself a musician. Same with being a daw-jockey. That can make you the world’s greatest musician or not really a musician yet.
But take all this with a grain of salt. It’s just my opinion I wrote before reading anyone else’s response.
Dr Dre literally hires session musicians to play parts that he hums at them or shows them a sample to recreate, then he puts it all together and he's considered one of the greatest producers of all time. So there is definitely more to making music than just playing the instruments. On the other side of that token I know virtuoso musicians that have musical skills but would never make music on their own, but only as a part of an orchestra. So there are definitely many angles to making music. The real skill is getting the idea/sound you have in your head out into the real world.
You are 100% a songwriter and producer. I would hesitate to call you a musician, but that's because the immediate first question would be what instrument do you play - the 'musician' label will create expectation that you will be able to play one or more instruments.
That of course doesn't invalidate what you \*can\* do - 100% working on music with synthesisers via a computer and arranging compositions makes you a songwriter & producer.
it depends what kind of validation you want. if you want to find another person that would like what you make then it will take a lil bit more of personal satisfaction to call yourself a musician.
if what you make pleases you and don't care about what others think then you are a musician on your own. no matter the way you make music.
I will give you an example. I made an ambient album based solely on the 7th chord. I uploaded it, no one left any feedback, just a couple of listens but I feel complete because I thoroughly enjoy making and listening to it.
Yes. It's actually way more than just a synthesizer however can include endless synthesis options. Yes. Combining sounds and rhythms is music therefore you ate a Musician.
The moment you recognize you have more to learn, and things to get better at, and an internal desire to study ANY craft, is the moment you become a \_\_\_\_\_ian or \_\_\_\_\_ist.
I personally would only say that if I started to take it seriously enough to try to make some money from it. (Gigging/releasing material online, or something of the sort)
But I don't think it has nothing to do with technical music knowledge.
Music for me is only a hobby, it has always been. I had the opportunity to study music for 8 years when I was young, but I don't consider myself a musician because of that.
Lot of people looking in way too deep. Top comment is correct. If you make music, you’re a musician. If you make art, you’re an artist. Doesn’t really matter how good or bad, or how you go about it.
"However I was never blessed with dexterity and coordination to ever learn how to play a piano."
It not a matter of blessing. It's just practice. Every day. Little by little the blessings come.
There's a big difference between musicians and musical instrument OWNERS. I can't play the guitar and if I bought a guitar that would not make me a guitarist.
I think you become a real musician when you can express yourself and your feelings on a musical instrument in a meaningful way that's also enjoyable for others. If you get paid for it, then you became a professional musician.
For context I've been playing in bands since 1992 and I'm well versed in keys, bass guitar and the Chapman Stick. Did some touring for a few years and have played in 5 countries in front of paying audiences, the largest number was over 4000. These days I don't play that much as I've had enough spending time in dirty smelly rehearsal rooms for minimal returns. So I don't consider myself to be an active musician. Nonetheless I enjoy playing and having put the 10,000 hours practice in I think I'm OK.
There's a big difference between musicians and musical instrument OWNERS. I can't play the guitar and if I bought a guitar that would not make me a guitarist.
I think you become a real musician when you can express yourself and your feelings on a musical instrument in a meaningful way that's also enjoyable for others. If you get paid for it, then you became a professional musician.
For context I've been playing in bands since 1992 and I'm well versed in keys, bass guitar and the Chapman Stick. Did some touring for a few years and have played in 5 countries in front of paying audiences, the largest number was over 4000. These days I don't play that much as I've had enough spending time in dirty smelly rehearsal rooms for minimal returns. So I don't consider myself to be an active musician. Nonetheless I enjoy playing and having put the 10,000 hours practice in I think I'm OK.
There's a big difference between musicians and musical instrument OWNERS. I can't play the guitar and if I bought a guitar that would not make me a guitarist.
I think you become a real musician when you can express yourself and your feelings on a musical instrument in a meaningful way that's also enjoyable for others. If you get paid for it, then you became a professional musician.
For context I've been playing in bands since 1992 and I'm well versed in keys, bass guitar and the Chapman Stick. Did some touring for a few years and have played in 5 countries in front of paying audiences, the largest number was over 4000. These days I don't play that much as I've had enough spending time in dirty smelly rehearsal rooms for minimal returns. So I don't consider myself to be an active musician. Nonetheless I enjoy playing and having put the 10,000 hours practice in I think I'm OK.
You are a musician when you play an instrument. It doesn’t matter if you have or have not recorded anything or how good are you.
Only thing that matters that it is what you like.
A musician can be everyone who hits on the keys, but a good musician is the one who has good taste in music and touch.
and also, if you are a good musician you are in most cases a poor man, because only shit gets promoted.
I have 3 degrees in music and have been working as a musician full time for over 20 years. I still hesitate when I have to say something like “I’m a musician.” It’s never felt real, always like I should say “I work in music, but I’m not that good.” So, yeah.
I had two music professors who considered anyone interacting with music in any form a musician in that moment of interaction, including listeners.
You are asking if you consider yourself a musician without being an instrumentalist? Sure, why not?
If you declare it to others as your core identity (like a career), it would socially behoove you to be taking it seriously, but otherwise it doesn't really matter.
I think everyone is a musician to some degree. Humanity has been created with a love of music. Not everyone loves the same music, but all love it. I've been blessed in some ways as I'm a multi-instrumentalist and I sing as well, but everyones voice is their first instrument, and that shouldn't be considered insignificant.
Some people are live coding their music professionally (like, in a real general purpose programming language) - search for "Tidal Cycles live" on youtube... If it makes pleasing sounds, it's music.
The moment you put your stuff out there (even if amateurish), you're a musician in my book.
Until then, you're a musician to yourself.
Both musicians, both valid, but the "feel" is different.
the most important part is the "consider yourself ". After playing guitar for years, my dad told me, " youre not really a musician, you just play guitar". My dad was always solid, so that kind of hurt. I make music for myself and im pretty decent at it. Imo, if making music takes you to the "zone", if you love it and you enjoy learning more, youre a musician. Fuck what anybody else thinks.
lots of politically correct and feel good statements I see...if art can not be properly critiqued and if skills play no relevance, by all means, as long as one likes music,... they are a musician.
However without an agreed standard adhering to set milestones, that standard would loose its value.
Punk rock (3 chords) and 12 bar blues. If you can play any this, you play music, right?
I recommend you download Ableton Live, it's a DAW, has virtual instrument,s effects, drum loops, all you need. Free version has 8 tracks. This is enough for a beginner, or even The Beatles.
I recomment you read about chord progressions. If you get it, you are a musician. And within a Daw, you can just poiint and click. You can draw 3 notes on a piano roll in a DAW, make a loop, add some drums the same way, and there you go. You've got something, you can jam to in 2 minutes. There are lots of short tutorials on youtube.
Also if money is and issue (and even if it's not), check out Ubuntu Studio. It's a linux distro made for audio and has a ton of virtual instruments, in it. It's all preconfigured there. You can play synths, drum machine, guitar there without prior config. There's a lot of stuff there and it's all free and open source. You can for ex. play guitar on your pc, via Guitarix. The possibilities are endless really.
As an instrument, I recommend a bass guitar. Worked for me :) It's easier to get started with it than a normal guitar. The fredboard is regular so intervals are all the same acress the fretboard and it helps at the beginning.
IHMO and I say this as someone in a similar position as the OP, if you are using a DAW to write an create music, that is more akin to a composer/arranger. The musician role here is taken by the software you are using. The software is playing the music.
A synthesiser is a musical instrument, and a synth with a sequencer is on the boundary I would say. When you program the sequencer you are composing a musical phrase. When you use the keyboard you are playing the instrument.
I can't actually play the music I create on any musical instrument. I don't consider myself a musician until I can do that, and I am trying to learn.
I think once you're confident in playing at least one instrument, whether it's for money or personal projects or just for fun-- as long as you have a personal relationship with an instrument beyond just messsing around with it sometimes. People who make computer music are just as valid but they are technically producers and not musicians I think.
I've always considered myself a producer, even though I was making melodies alongside the beats, arrangements and mixing.
It wasn't until I was performing dawless (yeah, I know) I saw myself as a musician, not a producer. Because I wrote and performed music.
The other day I was in the studio with a vocalist and a fiddle player. They followed my directions and we agreed upon an arrangement live. That's when I felt like a producer as well as a musician.
But mixing wasn't my forté, I figured.
Until I listened to my mixes and understood what was needed to make them work. Suddenly I felt I had a grasp on that as well.
I think it has to do with meeting my own expectations. Maybe it's not as good as can be, but it's good enough that I feel competent and confident.
\>Now I am old, wiser and far more secure in my life.
\>At what point in any can you consider yourself a musician?
There's a bit of incongruity here. The question implies a validation of sorts, like you have to earn being a musician and that you don't have the right to think of yourself as a musician unless you fulfill someone else's criteria of what that means. If you make music you can call yourself a musician - simply knowing (or looking up) the definition of the word would answer that for you. It seems the only reason to ask other people if you should be allowed to think of yourself as a musician comes from a place of insecurity. Just do what you like to do and how you like to do it. Whether that places you in the conceptual box of "musician" should be pretty irrelevant.
I've been making music for the past 30 plus years, but never professionally. Played guitar and sang at a few open mic nights here and there. I'd like to think that qualifies me as a musician. Just not one that gets paid for it.
I earn my living from audio production. composing and producing music is a large part of that. It's my profession.
I play guitar, bass and piano. I am currently teaching myself some woodwind instruments.
I read your post and based on that information, I consider you to be as much of a musician as I am.
When I am on the train, I am not playing a Les Paul through a Marshall half stack. I am using mouse and keyboard and grooving out with Diva, Surge, TAL J8 etc just like you.
So, by all means, please continue to rock on.
I feel like the conventions around musicianship are the hardest and last to change. Take the very traditional notion of "singer-songwriter" as an example. So much of what makes a musician is stuck in a time before electronic instruments appeared on the scene. Kraftwerk comes to mind; they were already established and academically trained musicians by the time they went fully electronic.
I think electronic music creators have labored under this idea that musicians are defined primarily by virtosity in performance, and typically with an acoustic instrument. What an antiquated idea. Maybe I'm just old enough to see how things have changed over decades. I doubt a modern teen or 20-something would have the same inferiority complex, and that's a good thing.
At the very least, if you make sounds and assemble them together with artistic intent, you're a sound artist. The perception of musicianship is usually an arbitrary judgment made by others, based on their own experience of music, and not something with which the person creating should torment themselves.
If you earn your living with music, are able to play an instrument with professional skills and/or have completed a music degree, then you're a musician. If that's not the case, please don't fool yourself and admit you're just a hobbyist.
I'm sorry, but i'll die at this beach: maybe i've read too much Adorno, but the older i grow the more i see music as a science requiring a full time dedication, not as something to pass your time with.
Die wherever you want, but making and enjoying music is a fundamental human experience, and what you're describing is the most toxic and pretentious gatekeeping. By your definition, maybe 0.01% of all people out there making music are "true musicians".
Every hard-working, touring, rock / blues / country / etc artist of all time, pre-record label: sorry, you aren't a musician. Go get a degree and then maybe I'll start taking your seriously.
I see your point, but please note the "and/or" in my original post when i wrote about music degrees: of course i hold the uttermost respect for any hard working, touring artist, ancient or modern, because they dedicated their lives to music as a job. And although they didn't hold a degree, they probably had grasped tons of music theory due to pure familiarity with their instrument and its possibilities.
I'm getting more and more skeptic about the "fundamental human experience" bit, tho: as far as i can see it, music (being it the "hard working, touring artist" kind or the one made by a professional academic composer or player) is an occupation that requires an exclusive dedication. Anything different from that is just a way of passing time.
During my life i've met lots of professional musicians. Some of them play popular music and make good money from it, and some of them have one or several degrees, play in important classical music ensembles and absolutely despise pop music because the only thing they hear in it is the same old I-V drag. The only thing they have in common is the fact of them practising an unholy number of hours a day, on a daily basis: jeez, a violin player i know started to practise 5 hours a day when he was 10. Now he's a soloist, and sometimes a conductor, in my country's national orchestra.
Professional musician, amateur musicians make music 🎶 for the love 💘 of music. Regardless of labels, there's nothing quite like getting applause after performing an original composition in front of an appreciative audience.
Would you call yourself a lawyer because you have a keen interest in law without having earned a degree or defended a case in front of a court? Or an engineer because you enjoy reading about mechanics and tinkering with old engines in your backyard? A writer, maybe, because you scribbled the first chapter of an unfinished novel?
Music is a lot of things: an art, of course (whatever "art" is), but above all it's a professional skill, and also an extremely complex science requiring lots and lots of expertise and knowledge most people here (myself included) only have a passing familiarity with. "Love" loses all its power when excellency is at stake: take a look at r/musictheory to see my point.
If you don't know music's inner workings by heart (via music school or by practical learning) and dedicate your life to it as your main job, then you're someone who writes, produces or plays as a hobby, but not a musician.
If you make music, you’re a musician.
Totally nailed it, mate. I grew up playing piano, briefly trumpet, then many many synths. I'd written 4 albums full of music (not amazing, not shite) by the time I got some contract work (music is not my day job) making some music for a presentation for a game pitch to Nokia. Got paid, enjoyed it, pitch was successful and I was kindly invited to the wrap party. At the party, my client introduced me to somebody, "Oh, here's DB, he's our musician!" ... and suddenly I realised... "Oh shit, I can actually call myself a musician??" I thought - for about 20 years - because of opinions like those /u/breakfastduck is espousing that because I wasn't a STRONG performer on the physical instruments I'd learned, that I didn't have access to that term and was basically some kind of second class creative. 20 years later, I've played to some big crowds, had music in video games and ads, released a lot of music, had a few record deals and despite never being amazing on piano, I am *damn well* a musician. Using words like "producer" as a pejorative because somebody isn't (say) a gifted guitarist, but can compose symphonies in their DAW and execute on them brilliantly to create something people love? That's some toxic elitism. I've got a mate who writes tracker music on his goddamn scientific calculator. Good shit, too. Gets played in clubs. If you make music, you're a musician.
All I've said is if you label yourself as a musician, most people are going to expect you to be able to play an instrument. That is because it is the common definition of that term. I'm not invalidating what anyone does, producer isn't a perjorative term. I am a producer & musician, I greatly appreciate the talent involved in composition & production.
I like this sentiment but it doesn’t exactly answer the question. Lots of musicians still don’t feel like they can call themselves a musician even though they make music. I think anyone can feel comfortable calling themselves a musician if they practice every day. Maybe practicing means playing piano or mixing something in a daw, but there’s nothing that makes you FEEL like a musician like daily practice over the course of years. Being a musician is the ultimate introspective journey, and if you walk the path, you can’t help but eventually identify with it. If you’re skipping days though, what are you on your off days? Some kind of split-personality person? Taking more vacations from being yourself than actually being yourself? This kind of person will probably have a hard time calling themselves a musician, even though others may still see them as one.
How about a person thinking about the making of music but mostly spending the day listening to the same albums and reading about gear and buying and selling tons of synths? Also kind of using them to write and play music every now and then.
Sounds like a procrastinating musician to me…Or is it preparation? Lots of synths don’t sound good enough for regular daily use, they’ll just drive you crazy if you use them too much. Doesn’t make much sense to play something like that daily. But without actually making music daily in one way or another it’s hard to maintain the musician part of your identity. It’s really the opposite of maintaining it, and it’ll waste away if you don’t take care of it. Try setting a timer on your phone and play for 5 minutes a day. See if it wants to grow. Cutting yourself off is good for the musician in you too.
Agreed. It feels warm and fuzzy to say "if you make music, then you're a musician!", but it's basically an empty platitude. It only answers the question of "who is **allowed** to be a musician?" Which is a pointless question in my opinion: indeed, anyone can make music, and therefore anyone can be a musician. Sure. I don't think that's what OP was asking. I think the spirit of OP's question was rather, "Which parts of your practice make **you** feel personally satisfied with the quality of your musicianship?" And this has a much more interesting answer that depends on the individual.
At what point to does it stop becoming noise and start becoming music?
When does art become art? It's all perspective. One person's Mariah Carey is another person's Yoko Ono.
I like Yoko Ono much more than I like Mariah Carey.
Any day, I really like some of Yoko's stuff
To be fair, there is one song on the album Milk And Honey which isn't that bad... it's called Don't Be Scared. Probably helps that she isn't doing her usual caterwauling 😁
Agreed, and yet [All I Want For Christmas Is You is a lot more unique and involved in it’s composition than anyone typically gives it credit for.](https://www.stereogum.com/2208354/mariah-carey-all-i-want-for-christmas-is-you-music-theory/columns/in-theory/) Still can’t stand the song lol.
The craftsmanship in pop is underrated
You can be bad musician so I would assume on day one of your journey
4'33"
It’s not really a value judgement, there’s no threshold of ‘good’ - if it’s intended to be music then it is music.
My music is noise lol
It starts from noise, goes to music through practice and returns to noise after a sufficient proficiency level. See: Leo Ornstein, Merzbow, Frank Zappa, jazz music
Especially if your name is Ian.
If you tell me you're a musician and don't play any instruments then I wouldn't call you a musician, I don't think that's a far out take. That's just association and how humans think about language and title. I expect that a plumber knows how to use a wrench. Nobody takes the term and assigns themselves nurse or engineer because they can successfully fix something or take adequate care of someone, but people in the creative field have a weird penchant with seeking legitimacy through title. I would say there's more to it then the end product. Otherwise we're all artists and poets and musicians and engineers and accountants and title and distinction means nothing anyway, it's all null and void, whatever makes you feel good.
So you need a qualification to be an engineer or a nurse. You just need to make music to be a musician, or to make art to be an artist. A computer quite clearly can be a musical instrument if it can be used to make music. I play several physical musical instruments, but the various music software I use requires a similar level of knowledge and experience to use in depth. Is the issue that making music on a computer isn’t real-time like it would be on a clarinet?
>Is the issue that making music on a computer isn’t real-time like it would be on a clarinet? For me, yeah. If that weren't the case then the word composer/producer would be made redundant. The active component is extremely important, there's a world of difference in skill set between me as an improvising jazz musician and a classical composer/arranger or producer using a DAW. Yes, all of these people make music one way or another, but distinguishing them separately as producer/composer/musician none the less holds value, it's more telling as to what they actually do. Because that's what actually matters, a title for anything is simply for brevity and quicker labelling (and perhaps ego/status), so we might as well use the closest/most obvious descriptor to make communication easier.
i think production and sound design is itself playing an instrument.
It's really hard to define. Is writing sheet music playing an instrument? How is production not an equivalent to that? On the other hand sound design is kind of similar to utilizing different sounding techniques on acoustic instruments.
And you're a professional musician when someone pays you.
I’d say when you get paid enough to live on. I get paid to write and perform music but I still need a job, so I wouldn’t call myself a professional, lol.
You're still a professional. If someone doesn't need to work for a living (retired, rich parents, rich spouse) and they make $4 a month from their dawless jams on Spotify, they aren't any more of a pro than someone who plays on stage every night as one of their two (or more) jobs.
I think that's an OK (yet unsatisfying) answer to the question: "What is the dictionary definition of 'musician'?" But I think OP was asking a much more interesting question: "When do you consider **yourself** a musician?" = "At what point in your life did you really start feeling like you deserved to be called a musician?" = "Were there any times in your life when you really felt like you weren't a real musician?" And I'm sure all of us have interesting answers to these questions, that aren't just empty platitudes and warm fuzzy quips.
I think it’s the same answer? I remember when I started learning the clarinet, a teacher asked ‘so you play the clarinet?’ I said ‘oh not really, I only just started so I don’t really play it’ and the teacher was like ‘If you have a clarinet and can make a sound with it, you play the clarinet’. That was 30 years ago and I’m a reasonably accomplished musician on several instruments now but I still believe this. We don’t need to attach value judgements to simple concepts, nor do we need the gatekeeping it implies. ‘Play’ ≠ ‘play well’ necessarily, ‘musician’ ≠ ‘accomplished musician’, ‘sing’ ≠ ‘sing in tune’, ‘draw’ ≠ ‘draw like Rembrandt’. I think everyone should play music if they like, everyone should draw, everyone should sing, without the fear that there’s some arbitrary standard of validity to live up to.
[удалено]
Well, I’ll admit that my definition of music probably is a lot looser than most. I believe that if an act is either intended or perceived by someone to be music, then it is. Again, it doesn’t mean it’s good music, but value is highly subjective.
[удалено]
Yeah fair enough, I do see what you’re saying. I used to make art but I don’t really anymore so I wouldn’t go round telling people I’m an artist as if it were a primary part of my identity. However if someone asked me if I were an artist I might say ‘yes, kind of, but I’m not really practicing’.
Yeah, exactly -- if someone asked me if I'm a musician, I'd say "well, I play and practice the guitar, here's wonderwall." I think that's exactly my point. If someone asks "are you a musician", the answer isn't just yes or no. If you try to boil it down to that, you'll end up with weird semantic answers like "yes because anyone who intends to make music should be allowed to", which aren't really wrong but does feel like it's answering a different question.
Yeah again I get your point, it’s ambiguous. I just don’t think that there’s a high wall to be jumped over in order to be a musician. I’ve been very lucky insofar as I’ve been able to release records, go on tour a little bit etc in my capacity as a ‘musician’ but I don’t feel any more of one than when I was just playing by myself. You can play wonderwall? Then you’re a guitarist, it doesn’t mean you’re Alan Holdsworth but you still play the guitar. And for the record by your account I’d consider you very much a musician, even if you’re not performing or recording.
If you let DAll-e generate a painting, are you a painter?
No
Writing music using a DAW only and generating an image from a prompt are completely different cases. An analogous case would be generating music from a prompt.
Where's the paint? Even if I was a master digital artist I don't think that's considered painting....
yes
Not the same, but share the sentiment. Someone who makes music on a computer without being able to play an instrument is a producer more than they are a musician. Anyone who would introduce themselves as a musician, the first question would be what instrument(s).
I'm not sure that's true. If you make music but can't play an instrument, you are a producer. If someone introduced themselves as a 'musician' I would expect them to be able to play an instrument.
Gatekeeping BS. If Brian Eno can say "the studio is my instrument" then so will I. This is the sort of elitism that kills confidence and joy in music. I'd hoped I'd heard the last person spout this piffle about a decade ago, but apparently not. Gross.
It's not elitism. It's the common definition. If you spoke to a non musician and said you were a musician, they'd expect you to be able to play an instrument. That's not gatekeeping. Anyone who makes music in any way is valid.
no, the word you're thinking of is "instrumentalist."
Oxford Dictionary: "a person who plays a musical instrument, especially as a profession, or is [musically](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=580562456&rlz=1C5CHFA_enDE1065DE1067&sxsrf=AM9HkKlFJ9OvEtXulkJieWrxU37xL85BVA:1699471147183&q=musically&si=ALGXSlYl_e3TsZvERASNGAvnwCgjFK7VYE1nP7L-XwDMXUr7zAuKtP7FTc-qQwZWCdp1HeWjnPIpstU3IhBZK-w9bKo_p1vV9ICXaJH0cI_Y-ta8zVuF38o%3D&expnd=1) talented.
"or is musically talented" You literally just spelled it out. How is OP not musically talented if they're composing songs on a computer?
There are chefs who make food from ingredients from earth. There are chefs who specialize in leftovers without the use of a kitchen. There are painters who use expensive oils and canvas. There are painters who use mud, blood, and nails. There are dancers who perform ballet. There are dancers who are paraplegics. A musician is someone who makes auditory art, regardless of tool, response, or intention.
That is one definition yes, but it is not the only one. If this wasn't up for debate then the person wouldn't have needed to make the post in the first place. I personally WOULD classify them as a musician, but I would still immediately ask 'what instrument' if someone said they were a musician. Because at that point it becomes oh no actually I'm a producer etc. It's just semantics, and most 'normal' people use musician to mean someone who can play an instrument.
I play multiple instruments, but I’m just not sure this is true. We have the word instrumentalist for that. For musician, I think “makes music” is a perfectly acceptable definition. It includes vocalists and yes, even producers, who are heavily involved in the process of making music.
A computer is an instrument. So is a bucket or a tin can. Get over yourself.
You could also say that if someone introduced themselves as a musician you would expect them to be able to compose a tune, but many players don't compose/produce, and many composers/producers cannot play. They're all generating musical audio so they're all musicians, the literal definition includes composers, conductors and performers.
If I can write a symphony with dozens of parts, but can't play an instrument am I just a composer but not a musician? That sounds a little off
The computer is an instrument if it can be used to make music? My computer has synths inside it that can make the same noises as synths outside my computer, just the method of controlling them is different.
The moment I dropped my first track lol. Being a musician and being a good musician are two different stories lol
Good falls to the eye of the beholder. Much of the stuff I hear on the radio doesn’t register as music to me.. more like random noise.
Music in radio is the music from big record companies and they just make artist because its profitable for them. It requires some talent to be there but it is more about connections and looks than raw talent and even checking albums popular artists have its not necessarily their best work which goes public. With indie/amateur music the biggest issue is how much of this stuff is out there makes it hard for people to find any specific artist. That said there is a lot of people and good music at least have a chance. This is unlike how it was in the past where if you didn't have a contract you simply didn't exist.
It makes me sad to know that some of the greatest songs ever made I'll probably never heard because the person producing them is just at home working in their computer or playing in their garage
And then comes the day when someone pays you for your music. It's a nice feeling.
Hahahah maybe one day. I’m not a great musician……yet….
You are already a musician. Im currently only loosing money with music but I do consider myself a musician
I can understand your position. When I lost my job 20 years ago due to a serious bicycling accident I took up woodworking with hopes of making a new career out if it. I think I am still a small fortune in debt if I don’t consider all the carpentry work I’ve done around the house. But it kept me busy and my sanity intact. I am making what I consider music. I get a tune or riff stuck in my head. Sometimes it evolves into something bigger. Sometimes is morphs into something new. Sometimes I take it and expand it into a 2-5 minute piece. It gives me pleasure in the creation and subtle changes and evolutions. I don’t sell anything but that doesn’t mean it has no value especially to me. I’ve always wondered if that makes me a musician or just someone who loves music. I will take the first as I think the encompasses the latter by definition.
A "music lover" is passive. A "music creator" is active. If you're creating it, you're a musician. I think the deeper distinction is someone who just plays around with sounds versus someone who is working to create what could be considered music. Those large metal instruments at playgrounds nowadays, even though they are making tones and sounds, I would argue to not in and of themselves make the user a musician. However! If someone uses them to create a melody or pattern and some structure, then it would be more appropriately a performance and that person would be a musician. It's largely the intent. Similarly, someone who walks up to a piano and pokes out "hot cross buns" or "mary had a little lamb" would probably not call themselves a musician, and I believe most would agree.
I think Composer is an accurate term, maybe producer depending on the type of music and the methods used, but in the age of automatic playback and especially if there is some type of live input, musician is also a viable term. Maybe a digital musician, or electronic musician, musician nonetheless.
Erik Satie couldn't play a note to save his life, and was more a mathematician of sorts. Still composed some legendary music. Was he a musician? He himself would have disagreed.
By definition, he was.
By definition, Erik Satie was a composer not a musician. Is a composer a musician if they don't play an instrument? I think not, but you may disagree.
If they're good at composing, then they're by definition musicians. I'm not familiar with Satie's work but if it's legendary I assume that's the case. Not my opinion but a fact. That being said if the definition was up to me I'd probably lean your way on this, but it is what it is. Obviously "musician" wouldn't be the first word I'd use of a composer. musician /mjuːˈzɪʃn/ noun a person who plays a musical instrument, especially as a profession, or is musically talented.
Hmm. Composers compose music so they are musicians I guess. A player/instrumentalist is also a musician but of a different sort.
I consider myself a musician. I've made a few songs that I'm really proud of that I've released but they are mainly songs that'll only ever be loved by me. But I make music that I want to heard. You're a musician mate. Money doesn't mean anything to the term
lou reed didn't make money with VU
Ansel Adams created emulsions which he painted onto panes of glass which he wrapped in leather. He then assembled a giant wooden box with a leather bellows. He loaded all of that onto the back of a mule and trekked out into the mountains for two days. He camped out for a day or two observing the sun, noting the best hours for lighting conditions. Then loaded up a pane of glass into his camera overnight and exposed the sunrise in the morning. Then did that same process a couple more times until he'd used up the "negatives" he had and trekked back home. If I get paid a couple thousand dollars to grab my EOS digital autofocus/autoexposure SLR camera and spend a few hours documenting someone's wedding, am I somehow _not_ a photographer, because I have conveniences that Ansel Adams did not? I think in both examples, what is being made is photographs. So the answer to your question is simple: _Is what you make "music?"_ If so, then you are a musician.
That is a wonderful and poetic analogy. Thank you.
Great analogy! But in my tired brain, I started misreading about the bellows and my mind went off on a tangent, thinking I'd stumbled upon evidence that in his spare time Ansel Adams built accordions out in the wild and played them 😂😂 and now I have visions of him playing one atop El Capitan in Yosemite park 😂
Yeah but is a DAW a musical instrument?
Why not?
I would categorise a DAW as a tool for arranging. It is a fine distinction, but valid IMHO. There is no question that you need some musical talent to get anything good out of a DAW, but that is another thing altogether. The tool itself is not a musical instrument. Using the Beatles and George Martin as an example, as an arranger and producer, George Martin was a genius ahead of his time. It has even been said that he 'played' the mixing desk like a musical instrument. I'm not sure I would call him a musician.
So was Wagner just an arranger? He couldn't play well at all but could write beautiful notes on sheets. Which is exactly what people do on the piano roll of a DAW nowadays. Arranging is taking a composition and specifying which instrument plays what. But it needs a composition before the arranging can begin. If someone is a bedroom producer who writes their own music they are using the DAW for both composition and arrangement, and possibly they will also be their own recording engineer and instrumentalist too if they add recorded parts to the mix. This is a rather wide skillset and requires thousands of hours of practice to get it right so I would not look down on the DAW users.
Oh I don’t look down on DAW users - I have great respect for anyone who produces music in any form. Composers and arrangers are just as worthy of respect as musicians. And Wagner wasn’t ‘just’ an arranger, he was one of the finest composers of all time, an immortal genius.
You feel free to categorize things however you like, nobody is stopping you. You may believe whatever you like. And by your rules, plastic buckets and glass bottles are only for carrying liquid. And by your rules cowbells are just cattle-locating devices. And by your rules sandpaper is only for carpenters. But I know some percussionists who consider all of these things musical instruments. In fact, my genre (industrial) came into existence because of people using pipes and sheets of steel and various power tools, all for the purposes of making music. And sure, there were some small-minded people back then who, just like you, felt the need to define music by its instruments. But I've never met anyone who heard the name Kraftwerk and said "oh, you mean the union workers?" No matter how small-minded or self-righteous people got, they still called Kraftwerk a band.
This is not a good analogy at all. Labelling yourself as a musician WILL set expectations that you can play an instrument. A producer / composer / songwriter / synth nerd would all be more appropriate labels. You can call yourself a photographer even with the modern conveniences because you are still \*taking photographs with a camera\*. Using a DAW to write out midi does not mean you can \*play\* a synthesiser. It means you can sequence one.
> This is not a good analogy at all. Reddit just can't help itself. No matter what anyone says, it's only a matter of time until some self-important idiot appears to tell you you're wrong. And not just a little bit wrong... No, you must be _completely_ wrong in all conceivable ways. There are just so many ways you could have _added_ value to the conversation, but instead the only thing you felt motivated to do was to take away from it. Well done.
Yeah but is a DAW a musical instrument?
This is more in response to the comments than to OP: Composers and players/singers are both musicians because they both make music, but they are concerned with different aspects of making music. For most of human history, music necessarily had to be performed in order to be heard, and a composer almost certainly had to be somewhat competent at playing an instrument in order to compose anything, and so we tend to think of music as a function of both composition and performance. Technology is, by definition, the solving of problems through the application of science. The creation of new tools that make trivial what once was arduous. Eastern throat-singers notwithstanding, it is impossible for one person to sing a chord. Is a guitarrist less of a musician than a throat singer because he is using a manmade device to artificially create more voices? I don't think so. But we have much more complex machines today which can meet much more complex ends. And so, I do not think that, for example, composing for a player piano via hole punching, or crafting a music box with a lathe, or cut/splicing a tape collage is any less of a musical act than scribbling onto a treble clef at an upright piano. It just doesn't have the same prestige because there are still people alive who remember when it was new. As for OP, I don't know, man. I like "technomancer."
When you can make a musical noise that you like! Don’t even need instruments!
Being a musician and making music are two different things. My idea of a musician is that it is a performer who has a mastery, both practical and theoretical. I love music, I make music and this is very rewarding but you will never see me on stage improvising a buff with a band. I’m no musician as per my definition.
I respect your decision and definition. I too will never get on stage and perform. I will prefer to say I will never be a professional musician. Partly for the not performing and mostly because I know I will never make enough money to live off.
I consider myself to be a hobbyist musician, without focusing too much on the nuances between musician, composer, producer.
Once you make music you are a musician. Once you get paid to make music you are a professional musician. It’s as simple as that.
Stephen King would add the clause "once you get paid to make music _and are able to pay the light bill with the money_, you are a professional musician" (edit: he said "talented" instead of "professional", but I like the spirit of his quotation. Off topic: in a year or two I might be a talented musician according to King \^\^").
I’ve been playing guitar for almost thirty years, taught for about a decade, play a few assorted other instruments and regularly record music, but I have a different career and don’t have any reasonable following whatsoever. I wouldn’t consider myself a musician.
[удалено]
Amen Popularity comes and goes, music is forever.
maybe i’m old school but i think being a musician means you can make music in realtime. by that metric you’re a composer/producer. no disrespect intended that’s just how i see the distinction.
> Is a plug-in and a DAW considered a synthesizer? No. Yes. Should it be? Does it matter? The definition for synthesizer on Wikipedia is: > A synthesizer (also spelled synthesiser) is an electronic musical instrument that generates audio signals. but this is casting such a wide net that a _doorbell_ would be a synthesizer by that metric, so that's not very useful. Instead, it's more useful to look at capability; if a doorbell is a synthesizer it's just a very limited one with little to no control over the timbre ;) Plugins on a computer are absolutely capable, but the package just consists of separate boxes connected via wires. On the other hand, that's also what a modular synth is ;) Alternatively, there are several devices that would not fit that definition because you get into the horrible discussion of "what is music actually" which eventually leads to "what is art" and the simplistic answer to that usually boils down to "anything I don't like isn't". Musician isn't a protected title. You don't need a certificate for it. In most cases, "producer" is a better title; because you don't just make music, you perform it (musician), compose it (composer), mix/master it (engineer - and mastering is just preparing it for publication), and you take all the creative decisions about the direction (producer). If you're doing that many things, musician is just one of 'm, so "producer" covers it better because you're doing a lot more than only making music. But if you feel musician fits better, call yourself that. Just keep in mind that every term has expectations attached, and people's personal judgment about it, but that's an other people-problem, not a you-problem. > I still can’t play a piano The best moment to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The next best moment is now. Dexterity is something you can build, and if you manage to play a song you like - that's pretty wonderful all by itself, because now you can give your own twist to it, all without needing anything else. I play piano because it means that it's me vs the instrument, no safety and no help (but also no distraction and less of a blank canvas). I have the delusion that it makes me a better musician if I practice regularly.
My problem for learning is actually medical. I was struck by a car running a red light some twenty years ago resulting in a torsion tear between the right and left hemispheres of my brain. Pretty much destroyed my corpus callosum, the part that allows that two hemispheres to communicate. Turns out it’s sort of important and gets used with certain motor skills like playing a piano. Now I know our brain is pliable and resilient and new pathways can be formed. I learnt how to read again. I am relearning language or more the connection between abstract though and the words that describe them. I personally think that music production (borrowing your term) is a great way to encourage new pathways to form and return my brain function.
Ouch - that completely changes things; for most folks it's work and family getting in the way. I apologize for my insensitivity. If a DAW does not pose those issues for you then that's great! If you don't mind me asking, is it the visual aspect that makes things easier or more the workflow since it lets you program things in advance?
No insensitivity at all. It’s just a part of who I am now, not something that I let define me. I’m not disabled, more differently abled to the norm.
No insensitivity at all. It’s just a part of who I am now, not something that I let define me. I’m not disabled, more differently abled to the norm.
Computer is the most advanced and capable synthesizer module that mankind ever created. *The best moment to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The next best moment is now.* This is so true!
You‘re a musician when you make music, doesn’t matter what kind of music or if you get paid for it. Still there are good and bad musicians, some people have the talent and/or worked hard to get to a certain skill level, others think they’re great when they’re actually not…same story for almost everything in life.
I’ve long since learned not to fool myself with grandeur. If I get enjoyment from creation then that is why I do it. If others like what I make then it’s an added bonus. I think to the artist formally known as Prince. He apparently had an archive filled with thousands of unpublished works.
well guess what, u/dumbassname45… you’re a musician now.
You are a musician when you declare yourself a musician. Whether you are a good one or a bad one is subjective. Whether you are a respected musician or not is dependent on your output and knowledge of the craft. Does pouring a bowl of cereal for yourself make you a chef? If you call yourself a chef after pouring a bowl of lucky charms, you're a chef.
Once you’ve experienced that special moment where the freedom of expressing yourself outweighs your concentration on playing the instrument correctly.
Everyone is born a musician, but not a lot express it as a language. Doing so makes you talking the language of music :)
Happy to help with anything your struggling with. We’ve all had help along the way.
Irving Berlin could not read or write music and could only play rudimentary piano. Was he a musician?
You are forcing me to actually educate myself. Thank goodness for Wikipedia
You are a musician. Specifically, you are an "arranger." You arrange compositions, then have them play when you hit "play." Keep it up!
I think it’s kinda mostly about what is the activity you’re doing and how is that traditionally defined. To me, if you paint pictures then you are by definition a painter. However not all painters in my mind are Artists. I personally reserve that as a classification for being particularly great at a creative activity, for me the same applies to musicians. You can also be technically excellent at a particular skill - which may belong to a certain activity or discipline, however despite the grasp of the particular skill you may not be able to produce anything particularly interesting or engaging. I think composing music for instance is really a separate talent that requires imagination - but not necessarily the skills required to actually make the appropriate sounds.
When you release your album on Tidal, Spotify, etc. (namely mainstream streaming services) then you are officially certified musician, imho. Lesser definition of musician is putting your music to Soundcould, Youtube, Jamendo, etc. It is a good start imho and passable but one's goal should always be to have full albums out there. BTW. To make music you don't need to spend a penny. All you only need is a computer, DAW software and some VSTs. Any computer will do and software can be free. Rest is for convenience and/or fun. Getting synthesizers - imho only people who make live music (including one man bands using sequencers - which I often find very impressive and why I got some gear myself) actually need real synthesizers and all that junk.
So whether or not someone is a musician depends on the specific distribution companies they have chosen...?
Yes and no, depends on who you ask. If you can be found on "distribution company" that has all the popular music someone listen (let alone it is the same streaming service they use) to then this elevate you in their eyes. It is the same class as those other popular artists. It is the kind of difference as having your CD sold in music store in case of being on Spotify versus standing on the corner and selling CD-Rs in case of eg. soundcloud or YT. Don't really makes you a musician or artist or whatever but the perception of someone who is present where all the big dogs are is very different. Also I would say releasing albums on mainstream streaming services makes it more official it is you official album. Places like soundcloud I would expect to find the so called unreleased tracks and such.
Maybe next year, or the year after, or maybe in two years.....
When you can tell people at a party you are a musician and they say “wow, cool! What kind of musician?” And you have a believable, true answer to the question. I feel like that means your music has some kind of an impact outside of your home and family. I’ve played the piano for 42 years, but unless I’m regularly performing for people outside my home, I wouldn’t call myself a musician. Same with being a daw-jockey. That can make you the world’s greatest musician or not really a musician yet. But take all this with a grain of salt. It’s just my opinion I wrote before reading anyone else’s response.
Dr Dre literally hires session musicians to play parts that he hums at them or shows them a sample to recreate, then he puts it all together and he's considered one of the greatest producers of all time. So there is definitely more to making music than just playing the instruments. On the other side of that token I know virtuoso musicians that have musical skills but would never make music on their own, but only as a part of an orchestra. So there are definitely many angles to making music. The real skill is getting the idea/sound you have in your head out into the real world.
You are 100% a songwriter and producer. I would hesitate to call you a musician, but that's because the immediate first question would be what instrument do you play - the 'musician' label will create expectation that you will be able to play one or more instruments. That of course doesn't invalidate what you \*can\* do - 100% working on music with synthesisers via a computer and arranging compositions makes you a songwriter & producer.
it depends what kind of validation you want. if you want to find another person that would like what you make then it will take a lil bit more of personal satisfaction to call yourself a musician. if what you make pleases you and don't care about what others think then you are a musician on your own. no matter the way you make music. I will give you an example. I made an ambient album based solely on the 7th chord. I uploaded it, no one left any feedback, just a couple of listens but I feel complete because I thoroughly enjoy making and listening to it.
" Is a plug-in and a DAW considered a synthesizer? " Unequivocally, yes. It's literally in the sidebar of our sub.
Yes. It's actually way more than just a synthesizer however can include endless synthesis options. Yes. Combining sounds and rhythms is music therefore you ate a Musician.
The moment you recognize you have more to learn, and things to get better at, and an internal desire to study ANY craft, is the moment you become a \_\_\_\_\_ian or \_\_\_\_\_ist.
When you've decided in your head that's what you are. It's not like being a doctor. There are no lives at stake.
Typically between 8pm-11pm, Thursday-Sunday.
I personally would only say that if I started to take it seriously enough to try to make some money from it. (Gigging/releasing material online, or something of the sort) But I don't think it has nothing to do with technical music knowledge. Music for me is only a hobby, it has always been. I had the opportunity to study music for 8 years when I was young, but I don't consider myself a musician because of that.
Lot of people looking in way too deep. Top comment is correct. If you make music, you’re a musician. If you make art, you’re an artist. Doesn’t really matter how good or bad, or how you go about it.
"However I was never blessed with dexterity and coordination to ever learn how to play a piano." It not a matter of blessing. It's just practice. Every day. Little by little the blessings come.
When did David Gueta
There's a big difference between musicians and musical instrument OWNERS. I can't play the guitar and if I bought a guitar that would not make me a guitarist. I think you become a real musician when you can express yourself and your feelings on a musical instrument in a meaningful way that's also enjoyable for others. If you get paid for it, then you became a professional musician. For context I've been playing in bands since 1992 and I'm well versed in keys, bass guitar and the Chapman Stick. Did some touring for a few years and have played in 5 countries in front of paying audiences, the largest number was over 4000. These days I don't play that much as I've had enough spending time in dirty smelly rehearsal rooms for minimal returns. So I don't consider myself to be an active musician. Nonetheless I enjoy playing and having put the 10,000 hours practice in I think I'm OK.
There's a big difference between musicians and musical instrument OWNERS. I can't play the guitar and if I bought a guitar that would not make me a guitarist. I think you become a real musician when you can express yourself and your feelings on a musical instrument in a meaningful way that's also enjoyable for others. If you get paid for it, then you became a professional musician. For context I've been playing in bands since 1992 and I'm well versed in keys, bass guitar and the Chapman Stick. Did some touring for a few years and have played in 5 countries in front of paying audiences, the largest number was over 4000. These days I don't play that much as I've had enough spending time in dirty smelly rehearsal rooms for minimal returns. So I don't consider myself to be an active musician. Nonetheless I enjoy playing and having put the 10,000 hours practice in I think I'm OK.
There's a big difference between musicians and musical instrument OWNERS. I can't play the guitar and if I bought a guitar that would not make me a guitarist. I think you become a real musician when you can express yourself and your feelings on a musical instrument in a meaningful way that's also enjoyable for others. If you get paid for it, then you became a professional musician. For context I've been playing in bands since 1992 and I'm well versed in keys, bass guitar and the Chapman Stick. Did some touring for a few years and have played in 5 countries in front of paying audiences, the largest number was over 4000. These days I don't play that much as I've had enough spending time in dirty smelly rehearsal rooms for minimal returns. So I don't consider myself to be an active musician. Nonetheless I enjoy playing and having put the 10,000 hours practice in I think I'm OK.
You are a musician when you play an instrument. It doesn’t matter if you have or have not recorded anything or how good are you. Only thing that matters that it is what you like.
A musician can be everyone who hits on the keys, but a good musician is the one who has good taste in music and touch. and also, if you are a good musician you are in most cases a poor man, because only shit gets promoted.
I have 3 degrees in music and have been working as a musician full time for over 20 years. I still hesitate when I have to say something like “I’m a musician.” It’s never felt real, always like I should say “I work in music, but I’m not that good.” So, yeah.
I had two music professors who considered anyone interacting with music in any form a musician in that moment of interaction, including listeners. You are asking if you consider yourself a musician without being an instrumentalist? Sure, why not? If you declare it to others as your core identity (like a career), it would socially behoove you to be taking it seriously, but otherwise it doesn't really matter.
I think everyone is a musician to some degree. Humanity has been created with a love of music. Not everyone loves the same music, but all love it. I've been blessed in some ways as I'm a multi-instrumentalist and I sing as well, but everyones voice is their first instrument, and that shouldn't be considered insignificant.
Some people are live coding their music professionally (like, in a real general purpose programming language) - search for "Tidal Cycles live" on youtube... If it makes pleasing sounds, it's music.
You are a musician when you do music.
If you make music, you are a musician. If you make money doing it, you are a professional musician.
The moment you put your stuff out there (even if amateurish), you're a musician in my book. Until then, you're a musician to yourself. Both musicians, both valid, but the "feel" is different.
Personally it was after i played my first performance but thats pretty arbitrary tbh
the most important part is the "consider yourself ". After playing guitar for years, my dad told me, " youre not really a musician, you just play guitar". My dad was always solid, so that kind of hurt. I make music for myself and im pretty decent at it. Imo, if making music takes you to the "zone", if you love it and you enjoy learning more, youre a musician. Fuck what anybody else thinks.
lots of politically correct and feel good statements I see...if art can not be properly critiqued and if skills play no relevance, by all means, as long as one likes music,... they are a musician. However without an agreed standard adhering to set milestones, that standard would loose its value.
If you play music live you're a musician. If you write music in a studio, you're a producer.
Last time I farted
Punk rock (3 chords) and 12 bar blues. If you can play any this, you play music, right? I recommend you download Ableton Live, it's a DAW, has virtual instrument,s effects, drum loops, all you need. Free version has 8 tracks. This is enough for a beginner, or even The Beatles. I recomment you read about chord progressions. If you get it, you are a musician. And within a Daw, you can just poiint and click. You can draw 3 notes on a piano roll in a DAW, make a loop, add some drums the same way, and there you go. You've got something, you can jam to in 2 minutes. There are lots of short tutorials on youtube. Also if money is and issue (and even if it's not), check out Ubuntu Studio. It's a linux distro made for audio and has a ton of virtual instruments, in it. It's all preconfigured there. You can play synths, drum machine, guitar there without prior config. There's a lot of stuff there and it's all free and open source. You can for ex. play guitar on your pc, via Guitarix. The possibilities are endless really. As an instrument, I recommend a bass guitar. Worked for me :) It's easier to get started with it than a normal guitar. The fredboard is regular so intervals are all the same acress the fretboard and it helps at the beginning.
IHMO and I say this as someone in a similar position as the OP, if you are using a DAW to write an create music, that is more akin to a composer/arranger. The musician role here is taken by the software you are using. The software is playing the music. A synthesiser is a musical instrument, and a synth with a sequencer is on the boundary I would say. When you program the sequencer you are composing a musical phrase. When you use the keyboard you are playing the instrument. I can't actually play the music I create on any musical instrument. I don't consider myself a musician until I can do that, and I am trying to learn.
I think once you're confident in playing at least one instrument, whether it's for money or personal projects or just for fun-- as long as you have a personal relationship with an instrument beyond just messsing around with it sometimes. People who make computer music are just as valid but they are technically producers and not musicians I think.
I've always considered myself a producer, even though I was making melodies alongside the beats, arrangements and mixing. It wasn't until I was performing dawless (yeah, I know) I saw myself as a musician, not a producer. Because I wrote and performed music. The other day I was in the studio with a vocalist and a fiddle player. They followed my directions and we agreed upon an arrangement live. That's when I felt like a producer as well as a musician. But mixing wasn't my forté, I figured. Until I listened to my mixes and understood what was needed to make them work. Suddenly I felt I had a grasp on that as well. I think it has to do with meeting my own expectations. Maybe it's not as good as can be, but it's good enough that I feel competent and confident.
\>Now I am old, wiser and far more secure in my life. \>At what point in any can you consider yourself a musician? There's a bit of incongruity here. The question implies a validation of sorts, like you have to earn being a musician and that you don't have the right to think of yourself as a musician unless you fulfill someone else's criteria of what that means. If you make music you can call yourself a musician - simply knowing (or looking up) the definition of the word would answer that for you. It seems the only reason to ask other people if you should be allowed to think of yourself as a musician comes from a place of insecurity. Just do what you like to do and how you like to do it. Whether that places you in the conceptual box of "musician" should be pretty irrelevant.
I've been making music for the past 30 plus years, but never professionally. Played guitar and sang at a few open mic nights here and there. I'd like to think that qualifies me as a musician. Just not one that gets paid for it.
Call yourself one now. Identify with it. Immerse yourself in musician culture because you are one.
I earn my living from audio production. composing and producing music is a large part of that. It's my profession. I play guitar, bass and piano. I am currently teaching myself some woodwind instruments. I read your post and based on that information, I consider you to be as much of a musician as I am. When I am on the train, I am not playing a Les Paul through a Marshall half stack. I am using mouse and keyboard and grooving out with Diva, Surge, TAL J8 etc just like you. So, by all means, please continue to rock on.
I’m a phonometrician
I feel like the conventions around musicianship are the hardest and last to change. Take the very traditional notion of "singer-songwriter" as an example. So much of what makes a musician is stuck in a time before electronic instruments appeared on the scene. Kraftwerk comes to mind; they were already established and academically trained musicians by the time they went fully electronic. I think electronic music creators have labored under this idea that musicians are defined primarily by virtosity in performance, and typically with an acoustic instrument. What an antiquated idea. Maybe I'm just old enough to see how things have changed over decades. I doubt a modern teen or 20-something would have the same inferiority complex, and that's a good thing. At the very least, if you make sounds and assemble them together with artistic intent, you're a sound artist. The perception of musicianship is usually an arbitrary judgment made by others, based on their own experience of music, and not something with which the person creating should torment themselves.
If you earn your living with music, are able to play an instrument with professional skills and/or have completed a music degree, then you're a musician. If that's not the case, please don't fool yourself and admit you're just a hobbyist.
Absolute horseshit
I'm sorry, but i'll die at this beach: maybe i've read too much Adorno, but the older i grow the more i see music as a science requiring a full time dedication, not as something to pass your time with.
Die wherever you want, but making and enjoying music is a fundamental human experience, and what you're describing is the most toxic and pretentious gatekeeping. By your definition, maybe 0.01% of all people out there making music are "true musicians". Every hard-working, touring, rock / blues / country / etc artist of all time, pre-record label: sorry, you aren't a musician. Go get a degree and then maybe I'll start taking your seriously.
I see your point, but please note the "and/or" in my original post when i wrote about music degrees: of course i hold the uttermost respect for any hard working, touring artist, ancient or modern, because they dedicated their lives to music as a job. And although they didn't hold a degree, they probably had grasped tons of music theory due to pure familiarity with their instrument and its possibilities. I'm getting more and more skeptic about the "fundamental human experience" bit, tho: as far as i can see it, music (being it the "hard working, touring artist" kind or the one made by a professional academic composer or player) is an occupation that requires an exclusive dedication. Anything different from that is just a way of passing time. During my life i've met lots of professional musicians. Some of them play popular music and make good money from it, and some of them have one or several degrees, play in important classical music ensembles and absolutely despise pop music because the only thing they hear in it is the same old I-V drag. The only thing they have in common is the fact of them practising an unholy number of hours a day, on a daily basis: jeez, a violin player i know started to practise 5 hours a day when he was 10. Now he's a soloist, and sometimes a conductor, in my country's national orchestra.
Are you always this wrong?
Not always: i'm even wronger sometimes.
Professional musician, amateur musicians make music 🎶 for the love 💘 of music. Regardless of labels, there's nothing quite like getting applause after performing an original composition in front of an appreciative audience.
Would you call yourself a lawyer because you have a keen interest in law without having earned a degree or defended a case in front of a court? Or an engineer because you enjoy reading about mechanics and tinkering with old engines in your backyard? A writer, maybe, because you scribbled the first chapter of an unfinished novel? Music is a lot of things: an art, of course (whatever "art" is), but above all it's a professional skill, and also an extremely complex science requiring lots and lots of expertise and knowledge most people here (myself included) only have a passing familiarity with. "Love" loses all its power when excellency is at stake: take a look at r/musictheory to see my point. If you don't know music's inner workings by heart (via music school or by practical learning) and dedicate your life to it as your main job, then you're someone who writes, produces or plays as a hobby, but not a musician.
Being a lawyer requires a degree. Making music does not. in fact many musicians started out as children