# Are "Hobby" musicians the second class citizen of the music world?



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

It's funny but you see a lot of posts and meme's (or this forum for that matter) that support the notion of a unity among musicians like it's a fraternity of sorts. 

I've noticed however if you look a little deeper (comment sections in FB posts, responses to threads etc..) there seems to be a degree of disdain from working musicians toward those who do it for a hobby. Sometimes it's subtle and others outright hostile. (not necessarily on this forum)

The dividing line often seems (like many other subjects) to be money but not always. In the current economic climate, especially in the music world I can see where a seasoned professional working musician who does it for a living might be put off by the local garage band playing one of the few places in town that has live music for a fraction of what he would require. This likely varies depending on the city one's in and the opportunities available. 

So here are some random questions along this line...

Are hobby musicians the second (or third) class citizens of the music world? 
What makes a person a musician?
How many times must a man walk down.... oh wait, how many gigs must one perform to be called a musician? Is that even a requirement?
Do people who exclusively play covers count as musicians no matter their facility on the instrument or must they be writers as well as performers?
Does someone have to have a certain degree of facility and music knowledge to be considered legit?
Should hobbysts stay in the basement and not take from the mouths of starving "real" musicians? 
Are hobbysts the "Uber" of the musician world?
How does one graduate from hobbyst to professional (or at least respected) without cutting their teeth in a live setting first?
What is the requirement to be considered a brother or sister in this fraternity? What's the hazing ritual one must successfully perform to be viewed as a member?
Is one a musician just because they think they are?

Just some curious thoughts for what I hope is a frank, civil and hopefully interesting discussion. I'm not trying to cause any friction although I fear the answers to some of these questions may not be comfortable to some (maybe even me!). No doubt the answers to these are subjective and will vary person to person. 

For the record I consider myself a hobbyst as I don't make my living with music. My cover band plays a handful of modest paying gigs per year and I'm comfortable with that frequency and remuneration hence the questions above.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

Hmmm. Lots of good questions.

Here are a few of my thoughts:

First, I would consider myself a semi-pro. All of my income comes from music, but I don't make a "living" since I only work part time. 95% of my income comes from teaching, but teaching grew out of playing gigs.

For me, a musician is someone who makes music, plain and simple. Covers versus originals doesn't even enter into it - to me, that is the dividing line between "musician" and "artist".

Hobbyists should definitely get out of the basement as early and as often as possible. Lots of opportunities to get out and play - find them! Or create them!

If you are good enough to make money, then you should expect to be paid. There are definitely hobbyists out there who are taking gigs from working musicians because they are good enough to make money but not expecting to get paid - I even know musicians who feel guilty about getting paid when it happens.

I think that you graduate to "professional" when you understand the world of business and have turned your craft into a profitable enterprise.

"Respect" is a whole other issue. I think respect comes from playing with, and for, other people. For me, the first hurdle in the "respect" department occurs when one makes the transition from "musician" to "performer". I am a regular attendee at a number of open mics and I have huge respect for anyone who puts themselves out there, no matter how well it goes. I have watched a number of people go from being a "lurker", to finally performing, to getting invited to open or do a "tweener" set at someone else's gig - and it's great to see. Building a rep as a solid player only comes from letting people hear you play. Building a rep as a solid teammate only comes from playing with others.

Just a few things that come to mind...

I look forward to hearing what others think.


----------



## Krelf (Jul 3, 2012)

I post here all the time. I'm a terrible guitarist, don't gig, not in a band and I have never been made to feel like a second class citizen on this forum. And in my opinion a musician is anyone who calls himself one.


----------



## skilsaw (Nov 4, 2014)

Just starting guitar and would love to be a hobbyist one day.
As I see it, to be a guitarist, rock musician, one must drink excessively, smoke pot, use hard drugs and have free sex with liberated bar-flies and groupies. Being a rock musician would be sooo cool.


----------



## amagras (Apr 22, 2015)

Musicians are all arrogant and a lot crazy, don't mind how they act or what they say (except for music teachers of course) and you'll be alright (and they won't remember after a day or two). You are as professional as you want to be. There is no line, there are categories: everybody wants to play lead guitar but those who don't or can't or haven't had the time or information to learn, often become excellent rhythm guitarists. Most band I've played with doesn't want a Joe Satriani in the guitar, they want a guy whos groove is solid and practice. To me "professional" is a person who practice his part every day, who dress properly for gigs, shows up early and is open to constructive criticism. At least that's what I think and nothing has made me change my mind in 20 years. I couldn't call myself "a musician" before playing with Sintesis, It just sounded too silly because I didn't know how good you need to be so a big touring band picks you up. With time I realized that my expectations were in fact too high, they didn't need too much of playing or sight reading, it was all a matter of attitude and practice.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

skilsaw said:


> Just starting guitar and would love to be a hobbyist one day.
> As I see it, to be a guitarist, rock musician, one must drink excessively, smoke pot, use hard drugs and have free sex with liberated bar-flies and groupies. Being a rock musician would be sooo cool.


not for me...would not thank you for that life. Would not want the life that accompanies the fame.


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

Scotty said:


> not for me...would not thank you for that life. Would not want the life that accompanies the fame.


Getting paid in Beiber sized cheques will change the story everytime. There is money in a lot of areas of music not always performing. Songs need to be written, movies scored etc etc


----------



## sambonee (Dec 20, 2007)

Tow categories really. Pompous asses and musicians. There is overlap. I tend to go for attitude first rather than skill. You can Learn skill. Attitude is pretty much set. 

A musician plays music. A nice musicians does it with a charitable heart and style b


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

shoretyus said:


> Getting paid in Beiber sized cheques will change the story everytime. There is money in a lot of areas of music not always performing. Songs need to be written, movies scored etc etc


See, I'm not about the cake either. I make an ok living. Sure they money could be better, but the more you have the more you spend and more you own and more to maintain...and replace. Too damn complicating. Rich and famous does not equate to being happy. Ask 90% of the huge lotto winners. Many feel it ruined them


----------



## amagras (Apr 22, 2015)

sambonee said:


> There is overlap.


lol, true


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

I say a musician is someone who plays music in some form.
They might be professional, serious, hobbyist, amateur, fantastic, horrible or whatever--but they're a musician.

I know I have enjoyed it more since I've been a hobbyist.
I've never seen any kind of negative attitude here, and where I've seen it on other forums, it's been the minority position.

Where I've seen an annoying attitude was along the lines of a Mustang & Jaguar forum where if you don't worship Kurt Cobain, you're not worth the time of day.

I haven't been there in ages.


----------



## fredyfreeloader (Dec 11, 2010)

There is a fraternity if you look deep enough or are unfortunate enough to find yourself a cross purposes with a certain group within the music industry. I fell victim to the "legit" vs the "working professional" musician. To be "legit" in the eyes of certain people you must be a member of the "UNION and a member of a"Symphony Orchestra" being a Union member is not the total answer, it's what type of music and where you play your music that in certain circles makes you "legit". I applied for a job as a Union rep/organizer many years ago, good pay and percs, the kicker was I was not considered "legit" by the Union Board of Directors because I played night clubs, cabarets, lounges and virtually any place that would pay me. I was simply told at the meeting they needed and wanted a "legit" musician for the job. They did acknowledge however that my experience would have been an asset.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

fredyfreeloader said:


> ...To be "legit" in the eyes of certain people you must be a member of the "UNION .....


Does this still exist?


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

greco said:


> Does this still exist?


You betcha, http://www.torontomusicians.org/


----------



## fsone (Feb 23, 2015)

Sambonee just a few words but said it all WELL DONE!!!


----------



## JBFairthorne (Oct 11, 2014)

As a hobbyist...I'm following this with great interest.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

i don't know that ive ever felt there was a fraternity. but maybe im not immersed enough in the scene to notice it.
its one of many hobbies for me. Im as much a musician as I an a hockey player. and like most of my hobbies, id like to be more proficient at them, and progress to "higher levels" of them....but reality sunk in a long time ago that I lack the ambition, dedication, and talent to be anything more than a hobbyist. and I like money.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

My father was a drummer and band leader for many years, I don’t know how many rehearsals and shows I sat through but there were tons, from the Palais Royale to the band shell at the Ex, Minkler Auditorium, as the orchestra for productions of Anything goes and Guys and dolls (can’t remember the theatre’s), they played plenty and were paid well for it or didn’t play.

Of all the 17 band members (swing of course), and the dozens that came and went over the 25 years, I’d say only a few guys made a living at it and played music full time.

But, they were all union members and I can tell you that everyone of those guys was a dyed in the wool musician, they would talk to you all day about music and if you asked would do anything to help you learn.

No you don’t have to make a living playing music to be a musician, otherwise there would only be 162 musicians in Canada.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Hamstrung said:


> Are hobby musicians the second (or third) class citizens of the music world?
> What makes a person a musician?
> How many times must a man walk down.... oh wait, how many gigs must one perform to be called a musician? Is that even a requirement?
> Do people who exclusively play covers count as musicians no matter their facility on the instrument or must they be writers as well as performers?
> ...


1. I don't know. To some, most definitely. To others, most definitely not.
2. Here's the dictionary definition:

*Simple Definition of musician*
: a person who writes, sings, or plays music
Full definition:

a composer, conductor, or performer of music; _especially_ : instrumentalist


3. See above.
4. Yes.
5. No - see "punk rock"
6. If you suck, no one will see you play a second time. If you're good, the word spreads.
7. Not exactly sure about the Uber comparison, to be honest. Sure you can pay someone $40 for 4 hours of cover tunes, but you'll get your moneys' worth. The difference in my mind would be a retired professional, who will charge for their time accordingly.
8. Professionals get paid. Good professionals get paid more. The only way you're going to make that transition without playing live is by being a composer. 
9. You have to play an instrument or sing. Ideally, you'll also have a passion for it. We all know people who took piano lessons because their parents forced them to. They wouldn't call themselves pianists or musicians, but they can play an instrument.
10. See #1.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

No other way to describe what I do other than to say, "I play guitar". 

I'm described by people who know me as someone who plays guitar, or someone 'who can play guitar'. It's funny how people determine if you can play or not - if I've got to play the intro to crazy train one more time *#*(

To call me a 'hobbyist' would hurt, 'cause guitar means so much more to me - it's simply not a hobby.

When I'm truly in the zone, I'm more _feeling_ the instrument in my hands. Squeezing it. Making straight-out noise. It's outrageous, weird, barely coherent music to _*my*_ ears...


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

I suppose that the litmus test is, "Don you play music for a living?". If you don't, then it's a hobby. That's not to put down a hobbiest - most I have known, from car restorers to model railroad guys to guitar players are far more passionate than someone who earns their living day after day from it.

As for me, I once was a hobbiest but am more of a professional (or at least semi-professional) now as it is a substantial part of my very humble income. I know this too because I treat it like work. If I pick up my guitar I am either going to a gig or I am learning something for a gig. Of course sometime this summer I will pick it up around the pool and play something just for me - then it'll be a hobby again


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

I play therefore I am a musician! It's all in your perspective!


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

Like any subculture (musicians as a subculture), there are different cliques within it. To some, you can be a virtuoso pianist who can play any piece of music put in front of you but if you can't improvise over a simple chord chart or learn a song by ear, you're not a real musician. Likewise, there are so-called "classical snobs" who consider everyone outside of the formally trained professionals to be somewhat "less" of a musician. I've played with and worked with both. It is indeed interesting.



> The dividing line often seems (like many other subjects) to be money but not always. In the current economic climate, especially in the music world I can see where a seasoned professional working musician who does it for a living might be put off by the local garage band playing one of the few places in town that has live music for a fraction of what he would require. This likely varies depending on the city one's in and the opportunities available.


Not that I've known more than a few dozen in my lifetime, but the working musicians I know have never been phased by being undercut by hobbyists. I asked that very question once to a buddy of mine who played guitar professionally. His response was something along the lines of, "Meh. You get what you pay for. Does a master chef get upset when someone goes to McDonalds instead of eating as his fine restaurant?"

I know there's some controversy over the "you get what you pay for" thing. But seriously, the well paid professionals I've seen or worked with were worth every penny. "Gather 'round children, and I'll tell you a story!"

Just over 10 years ago, I made a short run at doing music full time. Obviously that didn't stick, but I had some great experiences. When I started, I was under the impression that making $100 per person at a gig was decent. Once, I filled in for a buddy of mine (the same one as the McDonalds quote). He played guitar in a cover band that mainly did corporate shows and rich people events (I'm sure there's a proper name for those, but I don't know what it is). They gave me a list of 30 songs and a month to learn them all. I did pretty well with most of the material, but struggled with some of it. I thought learning *almost* 30 songs in one month was pretty darn good, but they seemed less than impressed at my first rehearsal with them when I hit some bum notes and/or missed a few cues. I kept grinding and got my parts sorted out, we did the show, and I got paid $400. No idea what the rest of them made, but I got the impression they were getting up to $5K per show (as a band, not each individual). They had their own sound guy, lighting guy, and even a couple of roadies.

To me, the money wasn't even the impressive part. Their song list was a few hundred songs long. Not only could they play every one of them note for note without needing any refreshers, but they were tighter than tight. It was scary good. 3, 4, and 5 part vocal harmonies perfectly in sync, syllable for syllable, like a polished/edited recording. The pitch of the singers was always perfect, the rhythm section's tempo perfect, and the planned sections where they improvised solos were always out of this world. I repeat... They were SCARY good. It was one of the first signs that I was WAY out of my league and might have chosen the wrong profession.

It wasn't the only time I had that kind of experience. Maybe I just happened to get lucky and play with some truly inspiring musicians, but all the people I've met who do this for a living are on a whole different plane of existence (musically speaking). I've never met a hobbyist who comes even close to the level of skill they seemed to possess. It seemed like they could play anything they wanted, any time they wanted, without ever having to struggle to learn it, no matter how crazy the material. It REALLY changed my perspective (and expectations) of professional musicians.



> Are hobby musicians the second (or third) class citizens of the music world


In short, yes. But that is the same in every profession. Professional athletes, actors/actresses, magicians, dancers, contractors, health care providers, programmers, etc. Rarely do any of them consider hobbyists to be their equals, and rightfully so. That isn't to say that there aren't hobbyists who have equal or greater skill levels and knowledge compared to the professionals. There is just something different about doing it for a living.



> What makes a person a musician?


If you play a musical instrument, you are a musician. But I'm lame. I prefer using dictionary definitions of words rather than speculating on other possible meanings and misuses. I think that covers the next few questions:


> How many times must a man walk down.... oh wait, how many gigs must one perform to be called a musician? Is that even a requirement? Do people who exclusively play covers count as musicians no matter their facility on the instrument or must they be writers as well as performers?


See previous answer.



> Does someone have to have a certain degree of facility and music knowledge to be considered legit?


I think that goes back to the first thing I said. Depends who is doing the judging.



> Should hobbysts stay in the basement and not take from the mouths of starving "real" musicians?


See my story above. I honestly don't think hobbyists are doing any harm. The musicians I've known who did it for a living mostly had multiple revenue streams. As in, they played in multiple bands, taught lessons, did session work, gave seminars, wrote articles, transcribed music, transposed music, composed, etc. Nowadays there are even more avenues (YouTube, Patreon, etc.) There are tons of ways to make money in music. Just have to get past the "art" and treat it more like a business.



> Are hobbysts the "Uber" of the musician world?


I don't think so. If anything, hobbyists are the "carpoolers".



> How does one graduate from hobbyst to professional (or at least respected) without cutting their teeth in a live setting first?


Again. Depends who you talk to. To me, a hobbyist is anyone who doesn't do it for a living. A professional is someone who does it for a living. I'm not sure playing live has anything to do with it. There are professional musicians who rarely ever leave their homes (guys like Tim Pierce come to mind).



> Is one a musician just because they think they are?


Good question. There are people who can only play one or two poorly fingered chords. They play an instrument (like the dictionary definition), but are they musicians? What are the standards by which we determine whether or not someone can play an instrument?


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

God... After reading so many short and sweet answers here, I really wish I knew how to say so much with less words.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

I also would consider myself a musician as much of my time & thoughts are taken up by music.

There's more to me than that though.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Some pros look down on hobbyists and some hobbyists look down on pros.

It's easy enough to find reasons to do so from either side.

I suppose I consider myself a semi-retired pro.

Some of the better players I've heard have considered themselves hobbyists.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

i wanted to be a rock star, not a musician. big difference


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

Pros and amateurs alike should never stop learning, inventing, discovering, investigating, and generally just be curious about their pursuit. They have much to learn from each other too. As an amateur I never felt any particular bias against me, in fact it was the inclusiveness that gave me encouragement and validity to go as far as I could with music. As a pro I hope I have never come across as biased...heck, it's my job to create musicians.

100% of my full time income comes from music, teaching mostly. The occupation listed on my tax return is "musician", if it's okay with Revenue Canada it's okay with me. I love the lifestyle, work from home, being my own boss, a liveable income, respect in the community, meeting some really nice people, and always learning. I get to do a little recording and gigging here and there but I don't have to struggle to make those things pay the bills with teaching as my bread and butter. I put in just as much work as my friends who gig for a living, it's just different work within the definition of musician.

If we play an instrument, we are musicians. As such we should be as inclusive as possible so that we all benefit.

There are many different kinds of musicians. My friend who has played the pipe organ for 65 years isn't the same kind of musician as my friend who has been a blues-rocker for almost as long. They have different definitions of music so they are differently defined musicians. 

There shouldn't be any class distinction within the fraternity of music. Witness Edith Fouke's collection of Canadian folksongs, Bela Fleck's research in Africa, or Alan Lomax collecting folk songs, or various music archivists like that of Yale University's Gilmore (sp?) library...that's respect.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

I don't consider "musician" an exclusive club. If you make music, you are a musician. 

Pro/amateur is a different question. I've made money but never made a living at music. I consider myself an amateur musician (hobbyist wouldn't offend me either). A record producer is a professional, in the music business, but may not be a musician.


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

Some great comments, insights and experiences here. Keep 'em coming!


----------



## Distortion (Sep 16, 2015)

Musician ? My opinion is someone who makes their primary living playing live music. They can gig three nights a week and do lessons on the side but to me that is a musician. Back in the late seventees a musician toured the dive bars and played 6 nights a week plus a Saturday matinee. Then moved on to the next bar on Sunday and went again.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Distortion said:


> Musician ? My opinion is someone who makes their primary living playing live music. They can gig three nights a week and do lessons on the side but to me that is a musician. Back in the late seventees a musician toured the dive bars and played 6 nights a week plus a Saturday matinee. Then moved on to the next bar on Sunday and went again.


That might what you need to put musician as your job, say on a passport or something like that.
But I find it a very limited definition.
Especially as in a way I don't feel like I chose to be a musician, but it chose me.
I wanted to play guitar ever since I was a little kid--I don't remember why--and here I am still playing it.
There are times my life starts to steer away from playing as much, but outside forces always steer me back.

Too paraphrase John Lee Hooker, it's in me & it's got to come out...


----------



## exhausted (Feb 10, 2006)




----------



## exhausted (Feb 10, 2006)

Well I think "hobby" anything would be considered differently in any profession. 

I'd be torqued if some dude was designing automation systems for free as a hobby. But it's a little different when it's talking about putting art out into the world. 

The whole weekend warrior cover band issue aside, anyone can make and put art out into the world and it more than likely will go completely unnoticed. But they can. Especially these days and it's not hurting anyone. You painted something, you're a painter. You make some version of the Mona Lisa that says something else. You're a painter. You make a note for note copy of the Mona Lisa, you're an entertainer. 

I don't play live. I used to. But I'm not an entertainer. I know that so I don't even try now. I'm a fat 40yr old engineer. No one wants to see that shit. 

But I'm a musician. I compose. I record. I put stuff out there. I'm not playing crazy train note for note in my pajamas on YouTube. But I've had music in little films, some compilation CDs. Is any of it good? Probably not but I'm not killing puppies here.


----------



## exhausted (Feb 10, 2006)

Oh and the hobbyists are keeping the musical instrument industry in business. Of course it's rotting from the inside like anything else but hey...


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

zontar said:


> That might what you need to put musician as your job, say on a passport or something like that.
> But I find it a very limited definition.
> Especially as in a way I don't feel like I chose to be a musician, but it chose me.
> I wanted to play guitar ever since I was a little kid--I don't remember why--and here I am still playing it.
> ...


I agree.
If Steve Vai had never recorded or gigged, but played in his basement or jammed with friends, while working days in a call center, I would still consider him to be a musician.
Meanwhile, Britney Spears plays tons of gigs every year.
to me, theres distinctions between being a musician, a performer, entertainer, etc.
Theres a subjectivity to it all, but for me, proficiency and dedication are qualities to be considered as well otherwise every kid that played violin for 1 year in band Gr.7 band class would be considered musicians for the rest of their lives as well.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

I'm currently in an online discussion about whether or not bands deserve to be paid. It's getting repetitive and while we're both keeping our cool, no one seems to be gaining ground. I feel like that relates to this question a bit.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Budda said:


> I'm currently in an online discussion about whether or not bands deserve to be paid. It's getting repetitive and while we're both keeping our cool, no one seems to be gaining ground. I feel like that relates to this question a bit.


discussions don't always have to result in a solution or conversion. few ever do. I think frustration sets in when people have this unrealistic expectation.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Budda said:


> I'm currently in an online discussion about whether or not bands deserve to be paid. It's getting repetitive and while we're both keeping our cool, no one seems to be gaining ground. I feel like that relates to this question a bit.


I've never found "Exposure" to be worth a nickel. Also, the times we have offered a "discount" for an initial gig we have either been offered the same again for repeats or not called back - because that's the bar owners business model.

My position is that if someone is making money off you then you deserve to have your share. Take that in cash, or in good feelings as you like - but make sure that you feel adequately rewarded for your contribution.


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

Diablo said:


> discussions don't always have to result in a solution or conversion. few ever do. I think frustration sets in when people have this unrealistic expectation.


I agree. In fact the reason I started this discussion was to simply do that, have a discussion and gather different viewpoints and ideas.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Re: my discussion. I took an issue with someone saying that being in a professional band is not a real job. It is very much so a real job.

As it happens, what he meant to say was that referring to your band as your job because you work at it, versus being in a band that gets paid to perform are two different things. We both agree on that point. Overall we agreed on most points the other person made, and I realized part way through that he just wasn't being clear in presenting his ideas.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Budda said:


> Re: my discussion. I took an issue with someone saying that being in a professional band is not a real job. It is very much so a real job.


I have seen this 'attitude' so many times during the years, I just shake my head now. People I have know in the past who have said this because they don't how or understand how you are going get and keep that house in the burbs with a wife and 2 1/2 kids if you don't get a real job like at a bank or hospital or construction company or whatever.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Diablo said:


> Theres a subjectivity to it all, but for me, proficiency and dedication are qualities to be considered as well otherwise every kid that played violin for 1 year in band Gr.7 band class would be considered musicians for the rest of their lives as well.


Well they can say they used to be a musician...


----------



## amagras (Apr 22, 2015)

You are a musician as long as you make music. To be a musician means to be a person who makes music. Now, if someone asks what do you do for a living you can only say "I'm a musician" if you make a living out of the music. But as long as you make music you can be a musician, at least in your own opinion. 
In the other end, there are people who speak on top of a prerecorded background without too much of a sense of rhythm and melody and they should be called poets, entertainers, artists or something else but no musicians. I'm not talking about rappers of course because rappers need to be in the groove and that means to be a musician (except for Kane West, he's a shame, not a musician). 
Terms such as "aspiring musician" should be replaced by "aspiring profesional musician" or "aspiring virtuoso" but as long as you can play or sing something that entertains you are the musician...at least in tribal communities


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

What do you call a person that hangs around with "musicians"?

There are 2 answers to this question.

1. A drummer (drummers are percussionists)
2. A singer (singers are vocalists)

'nuf said


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2016)

Not all singers are vocalists.


----------



## TA462 (Oct 30, 2012)

A few weeks ago I was at a party one of my wife's friends was having. I didn't know anyone there except for a couple people. I'm talking with a few people and out of the blue this guy asks me if I was a musician. I guess my wife must have mentioned I play guitar at work. I said no, I play guitar as a hobby. A musician to me is someone who makes and records music for profit and for the enjoyment of others to listen to. I play guitar because I enjoy it and not because I want to make money or make other people happy while listening to me.


----------



## amagras (Apr 22, 2015)

The same happened to me before playing with a professional band, it never crossed my mind to call myself a musician before, but, after a few years playing for a living I became tired of "being the musician" all the time and have to play in every reunion and party so I started encouraging the "no musicians" around to embrace their talent and take it out (and why not, entertainment me). It turned out really nice, one of them plays in a cruiser around Greece now.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

amagras said:


> You are a musician as long as you make music. To be a musician means to be a person who makes music. *Now, if someone asks what do you do for a living you can only say "I'm a musician" if you make a living out of the music.* But as long as you make music you can be a musician, at least in your own opinion.


I don't play music for a living, but I play music for life. (Do you live to work or work to live?)

Years ago, I used to define myself by what I did for a living. "I'm a xxx at Corp YYY". A decade and a bit ago, after a life-threatening and life-changing illness, I did a 180. I realized work was just what I did to allow me to pay for what I really DO. And that is play music, as much and as often as I can. It also occupies a significant part of my conscious thought. Now if someone asks me what I do, I say I'm a (amateur) musician/guitar player and may or may not mention what I do for 'the man' to pay for my life. The only reason I don't play for a living is that I make far more (and thus get to play for fun far more) than I probably would as a pro musician. But I greatly respect those that choose to make it there vocation.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

I think a musician is truly a lifetime student of their craft. To many, such as Elvis or Carrie Underwood - as much as they may play instruments, you would most probably think of them as entertainers and not necessarily musicians.


----------



## Guest (Jan 11, 2016)

Even Geddy Lee's mother didn't know what he did for a living.
After watching one of their shows, she apparently exclaimed,
'Oh, so he's an entertainer'.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

I play guitar.


----------



## Swervin55 (Oct 30, 2009)

exhausted said:


> I'm a fat 40yr old engineer. No one wants to see that shit.


Man, this made me laugh. Thanks from another fat old engineer.


----------



## skilsaw (Nov 4, 2014)

Budda said:


> I'm currently in an online discussion about whether or not bands deserve to be paid.


I heard years ago that Holland had a "National Symphony Orchestra" and a "National Opera Company". The musicians and singers were federal employees and got salary plus benefits. While symphony or opera tickets here are $100, in Amsterdam, tickets cost $15. 
That's valuing musicians, and appreciating music. I wonder if Holland has a "National Rock Band"?


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Yup, people who perform in orchestras generally get paid, and they're part of the musician's union for that country.


----------



## Distortion (Sep 16, 2015)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musician


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

Clicked on the link above, first thing I saw was a pic of someone playing bass. Are they trying to start a fight?



skilsaw said:


> I heard years ago that Holland had a "National Symphony Orchestra" and a "National Opera Company". The musicians and singers were federal employees and got salary plus benefits. While symphony or opera tickets here are $100, in Amsterdam, tickets cost $15.
> That's valuing musicians, and appreciating music. I wonder if Holland has a "National Rock Band"?


I worked with a guy who was retired military forces. His job was trumpet player. He played with the touring military band for, like, 20 years. He talked like a soldier and had lots of soldier stories. But he didn't have the basic training physique, then or 20 years earlier. He was built like he drank for a living. Which he kinda did, by the sound of his stories.


----------

