Are vocalists considered "real musicians" here? :)

[Ladyhawk]

I am an alto soloist.

[bullimiami]

1. a real singer is.

not one of those autotuned, comped manufactured ones.

I always appreciate a real singer with talent. I see so much of the other.

[Ladyhawk]

2. I believe I have real talent. :)

I may not be the best in the world, but I have talent. :)

[DeepGreen]

3. You bet !!

One of my favorites is Steven Tyler !

[Ron Green]

4. I saw Ella Fitzgerald in a rehearsal once and I promise you

she was as much a musician as anybody I ever saw. She knew when one sax player in an 18-piece band was playing a little sharp, and just how to tell him about it.

[mitchum]

6. She was definitely a musician...

and probably the greatest singer to ever walk the face of the earth

[no name no slogan]

5. If you are a singer, and not a 'vocal stylist'

I've worked with both (and also sing lead myself), and singers are every bit a musician as is everybody else in the band.

You can tell a real singer right away. A REAL singer listens to the band, takes cues from the band, gives cues to the band, and is an integral part of the performing unit. S/he knows that s/he is only as good as the weakest member of the backing band, and does what s/he can to help them give a great performance.

A 'vocal stylist', OTOH, thinks s/he is the only part of the unit that matters, doesn't pay attention to the band's groove, generally can't sing-- except for various trilly, whooping, vocal effects, doesn't know what a 'count' is, has no sense of key or melody, and generally acts like a pain in the @$$ when s/he isn't getting enough praise heaped on her/him.

Oh, and if the 'vocal stylist' is a full member of the band, he also leaves as soon as the gig is finished with his 'entourage', and doesn't lift a finger to pack up the gear-- not even his own microphone.

Yeah, I like singers. 'Vocal Stylists', OTOH.... :evilgrin:

[Ladyhawk]

8. Are you saying that a vocalist by herself is not a musician?

Most of the music I sang in college was a cappella. SATB, no accompaniment at all. I guess that's why I have such fondness for polyphonic Renaissance music. :)

[no name no slogan]

11. Oh no-- soloists are musicians, too

I quite enjoy vocal music, myself. Unfortunately, as somebody who both plays instruments and sings, I've had more experiences with "vocal stylists" who didn't know a thing about music, yet fancied themselves to be musicians. :D

[Lydia Leftcoast]

7. Oh,yes, I should think so, she said, being a singer herself

Karaoke should have proved once and for all that even though almost everybody can sing, not that many people are real singers.

Whether a soloist or a choral or small group singer, you have to have a good sense of pitch and rhythm and an ability to convey the emotional content of the music, as well as the ability to "stay on the same page" as the other singers or whichever instrumentalists you happen to be singing with.

I'm in a cathedral choir that requires an audition and sightreading skills just to get into the stalls. We do a minimum of two full-scale anthems a week, often more if it's one of the Sundays when we sing evensong or have special services for religious holidays. If we couldn't sightread, we could never keep up the pace. Sometimes we do pieces that really test our skills.

An example is "Take Him Earth for the Cherishing," which English composer Herbert Howells wrote in memory of JFK. It's beautiful, but it keeps switching keys and time signatures, goes from four parts into six or eight parts and then back again, and has some of the weirdest entrances it has ever been my privilege to try to get.

You can't sing that if you're not a musician. :-)

[Ladyhawk]

9. Dare I post an MP3 of myself?

The only one I have available is yours truly accompanied by crappy midi, but hey, it's me: "On My Own" from Les Miserables. Also, it's more "contemporary." I can do classical, too, which is stylistically different. B-)

[Ladyhawk]

24. OK, I'll post an MP3. I must be a glutton for punishment.

As I said, the only one I have available is yours truly accompanied by MIDI, but hey, it's me: "On My Own" from Les Miserables. This piece is definitely "contemporary." I can do classical, too, which is stylistically different. B-)

I have memorized a few nice Italian arias; some pieces from Messiah, including the very tough-to-sing "O Thou That Tellest"; a Brahms piece, etc. I've been debating recording them. The entire apartment complex has to listen when I practice. :)

Remember, I don't have professional recording gear and the accompaniment is only a MIDI. This is a one-shot deal. I couldn't go back and fix the mistakes.

"On My Own" from Les Miserables, sung by Ladyhawk

[Ramsey]

10. Absolutely

Trained vocalists are as much musicians as any instrumentalist.

[TrogL]

12. wanna join a choir?

I desperately need another alto in my church choir. I'm getting tired of singing counter-tenor.

[Ladyhawk]

13. LOL...where are you? :) n/t

I'm looking for a good chorus. I am planning on trying out for the Modesto Symphony Chorus. I was close friends with my prior director, but he shocked me by proving to be just as crazy as any other fundy bushbot.

I'm not a Christian anymore, but for some reason the verse about "whited sepulchres" comes to mind. That's what these religious reichers are.

[leftofthedial]

14. singers are musicians

it's drummers who aren't.

;-)

[ProfessorGAC]

15. Some Are

The ones who are strictly vocalists when performing, but know how to play some instrument (like the folks here who mentioned Ella, who is an accomplished piano player) are.

Ones who are just wailers are singers, but not necessarily musicians. Being able to use the voice, even if very well, doesn't make you a musician if you don't understand what you're singing, and why, plus what the other players are doing and why.

Someone like Ella, or Cyndi Lauper, or Shirley Manson, all understand the WHOLE of the music, so they are, by definition, musicians.
The Professor

[leftofthedial]

17. the same thing you just said could be said about guitarists

or bassists

or trombonists

or anyone else.

Generically, singers are just as much musicians as anyone else using an instrument to make music.

Now drummers, on the other hand . . . ;-)

[ProfessorGAC]

18. You're Right

I've said to my friends for years that there is a difference between being an "x" player and a musician. We've known many guitarists that were technically proficient but never played an original idea nor could deviate from the script in any way. They played guitar, but not music.

Thus, i'll stand by my original comment, but add your extension. Anybody who understands what's going on in the whole is a musician in my book. If they only hear and work what they're doing in isolation from a greater understanding, they're just a technician.
The Professor

[Susang]

20. Well said, Left

I've sang with a couple players who were some of the worst musicians I ever met. Oh sure they could play their instruments, but technical knowledge does not a musician make. ;-)

[ProfessorGAC]

21. I've Found The Opposite To Be True

But, it might be a difference in definition. Having the physical skill to play the instrument is not, to me, the technical skill to play music. Part of the technical knowledge is understanding the music and how things all fit together, even the groups of notes one is playing for their own part.

That's why i earlier mentioned the idea that some people are guitar players and some people are musicians who play the guitar. There is a difference, and the "technical" skill is the difference.

So, the more technical knowledge about the music itself, the better i've found the player to be.
The Professor

[Ron Green]

22. I would go beyond your term of "technical skill," which seems to encompass

the understanding of how the music is notated as well as other elements of performance. I have worked with trained players who are outside their stylistic realm and therefore incompetent musicians in a given situation, while someone unlettered in music might shine in the same setting. Generally speaking, the player (or singer) with the training to understand the technical aspects of the music will be better in most situations, but not always. The ineffable ability to connect with the inner truth of the music can be hindered, as well as enhanced, by the technical skills. IMHO.

[ProfessorGAC]

25. I Would Consider The Ability To Properly "Hear" The Music. . .

. . .to be a technical skill. Therefore, i think we're merely seeing a difference in definition. I don't consider the "technique" aspect and the "technical" aspect to be the same.

So, i would guess we're sort of saying the same thing, but a minor difference in definition appears to be getting in the way.
The Professor

[Ladyhawk]

23. Technical skills need to be meshed with the emotion of music.

Proper phrasing, proper dynamics, plus the emotion of the musician can make a huge difference. I believe music to be both a left-brain and a right-brain activity. Only people who have learned to use both make great musicians. Technical skill and emotion mix to create beauty.

That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

[ProfessorGAC]

26. That's Exactly My Point

Boy, i must have expressed myself inadequately. You're the 2nd poster who is agreeing with me while thinking they're disagreeing. You just reinforced the point i was making.

Technical skill INCLUDES the understanding of the music to the point that interpretation is not only possible, but instinctual. Bringing the music to the instinctive level will ALWAYS allow emotion to enter.

I think everyone here is misunderstanding what i mean by technical. I DON'T mean technique! Having excellent piano technique and being a great musician that plays piano can be mutually exclusive. Having excellent technical ability in music and being an excellent musician are not. Look, Billy Joel has good technique and can't play his way out of a wet paper bag. His technical ability as a musician is sorely lacking because he doesn't really hear the whole thing. (If he did, his music wouldn't be so pedestrian.)

Thelonious Monk had poor technique but VAST technical ability. He heard the big picture, including some elements nobody else heard until he did them.

Technique and technical ability are not the same thing for me. I know a guitar player who can play almost anything, if he learns it note for note from the recording. His technique is fine. But, i do NOT consider him a good musician because i know for a fact that he doesn't understand what he's doing, nor does he hear the whole. He lacks that technical ability.

Now, do you get what i'm saying, or have i failed again?
The Professor

[Ron Green]

27. Right. So your term "technical ability" is also called "musicianship."

:thumbsup:

[ProfessorGAC]

28. Sure. That's OK By Me

That's fine. Like i said, i think we were clouded by different definitions of the same term. So, i think we agree. Right?
The Professor

[Tafiti]

16. Most definitely, in my opinion.

But perhaps, as a singer, I am a bit biased.

If you ask me, the voice is essentially a natural instrument, and is an integral part of a musical group experience when all is said and done. Of course, as a guitarist also, I can say that the guitar sings just as surely as a voice does, sometimes making a voice either unnecessary or an unwelcome distraction. Pat Metheny is like this for me.

[NC_Nurse]

19. I'm a singer

so I vote YES! :D

[ZoCrowes]

29. Sure

I find singing to more difficult than guitar, bass or drums (I play em so thats all I can compare it to.)