Community post
difference between a musician and instrumentalist
MUSICIANS ARE RICH AND SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE
#Instrumentalists are broke
#Singers are beggarly
#Musicians are rich
The greatest misconception of all times is that an instrumentalist or singer is a musician or vice-versa.
"Don't Let Anyone Tell you Otherwise..."
There's a difference between a musician that plays/sings and an instrumentalist/singer. (Rhema for another day).
A musician is NOT JUST an instrumentalist/singer. There are musicians who can't sing or play and they have a career in music and are doing well.
A musician is anyone who practices music as a paid profession (aka - "music practitioner").
"In Other Words..."
■ You can be an instrumentalist or singer without being a musician.
□ E.g. Bankers, lawyers, etc., who play and sing in church.
■ You can be a musician without being an instrumentalist or singer.
□ E.g. A music journalist or promoter doesn't necessarily need to sing and play and there are producers who don't sing or play (sad to say).
Someone reading this post is graduating from being a singer or instrumentalist into being a career or professional musician.
Matriculation from being an instrumentalist to the discovery and pursuit of a career in music performance is taking place.
Replies (1)
I can't agree. A musician is someone capable of making music to a certain standard, whether by singing, playing a traditional instrument, or electronically. An amateur can be a musician - just not a professional musician - though to my mind they have to reach, as I say, a certain level. I play recorder, for example, but couldn't be called a musician. A promoter, music journalist or producer might be said to be in the music profession but having a career in music, if language is to mean anything, doesn't qualify a person as a musician.