Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

DJs at Festivals? WTF?


Bilbo
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't think you can declare yourself a musician or an artist unless people appreciate what you are doing is art or music.

I'm sure there are people who play music for their own enjoyment while alone, so I'm not sure exactly where that boundary lies other than if you are making music for yourself, at some point someone will ask to hear you. Until then, simply calling yourself a musician doesn't make you a musician.

Edited by TimR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One is a musician just as soon as there's question of music, I'd say, and stick to the definition given above. Either ...

[color=#800080][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]One skilled in the science or practice of music. [/font][/color]

[color=#000000][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]... or ...[/font][/color]

[color=#800080][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2 A professional performer of music, esp. of instrumental music.[/font][/color]

[font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][color=#000000]Either or both of these bestow the 'status' of musician. A composer may not be able to play any instrument at all, but, if 'skilled in the science of', qualifies. Someone performing music, albeit by sequencer or samples, is equally qualified. Someone holding a trombone is not a musician, unless that holding is part of a musical work. It seems so much simpler if we stick to the definition. Putting a record on a turntable does not qualify. Using that to make music, does.[/color][/font]

Edited by Dad3353
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1439542750' post='2843657']
I don't think you can declare yourself a musician or an artist unless people appreciate what you are doing is art or music.

I'm sure there are people who play music for their own enjoyment while alone, so I'm not sure exactly where that boundary lies other than if you are making music for yourself, at some point someone will ask to hear you. Until then, simply calling yourself a musician doesn't make you a musician.
[/quote]

Not sure I agree with that. There's nothing in the definition concerning such. Alone on a desert island, playing bongos on coconuts would qualify the player as a musician, without an audience of any kind. Indeed, even [i]thinking [/i]of jungle beats, without playing them, still counts. The key is in the 'skilled in the science of' again. That skill may be cerebral (as a composer, for instance...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1439543354' post='2843667']


Not sure I agree with that. There's nothing in the definition concerning such. Alone on a desert island, playing bongos on coconuts would qualify the player as a musician, without an audience of any kind. Indeed, even [i]thinking [/i]of jungle beats, without playing them, still counts. The key is in the 'skilled in the science of' again. That skill may be cerebral (as a composer, for instance...).
[/quote]

Yes. But for it to be music and not just noise, someone has to appreciate it as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1439544979' post='2843686']
Yes. But for it to be music and not just noise, someone has to appreciate it as such.
[/quote]

That's a rather limited definition; the OED has wider senses than that, including ...

[color=#800080]...[/color]
[color=#800080]4 A piece of music composed or performed.[/color]
[color=#800080]...[/color]

As long as it's 'composed or performed' (that's to say: not accidental, but deliberate...), it can be called music, at least by the composer or performer. Others may not like the result, but music it is, to someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1439544979' post='2843686']
Yes. But for it to be music and not just noise, someone has to appreciate it as such.
[/quote]

Ah.....But English people love noise.

[i]"The English may not like music, but they do love the noise it makes"[/i]
[i]Sir Thomas Beecham.[/i]


Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_beecham.html#0CBm5UiqidoLzlTf.99

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1439545990' post='2843704']


That's a rather limited definition; the OED has wider senses than that, including ...

[color=#800080]...[/color]
[color=#800080]4 A piece of music composed or performed.[/color]
[color=#800080]...[/color]

As long as it's 'composed or performed' (that's to say: not accidental, but deliberate...), it can be called music, at least by the composer or performer. Others may not like the result, but music it is, to someone.
[/quote]

No. It can't be called music. You can compose noise. Just because you have assembled some sounds doesn't make the result music.

You need at least two people. One to make the noise and an independent person to qualify it as music. Otherwise I could go outside and shout and bang my dustbin lids and call it music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1439548752' post='2843749']
No. It can't be called music. You can compose noise. Just because you have assembled some sounds doesn't make the result music.

You need at least two people. One to make the noise and an independent person to qualify it as music. Otherwise I could go outside and shout and bang my dustbin lids and call it music.
[/quote]

You could indeed. I'll stick with the OED definition. Music is music, even if only composed in one's head. No audience is necessary at all. No third party is required for it to be music, as long as the composer and/or performer meant it to be.
There are other definitions, but they don't exclude this one; they just add [i]further [/i]meanings. The primary definition, for instance, is ...

[color=#800080]1 That one of the fine arts which is concerned with the combination of sounds with a view to beauty of form and the expression of emotion; also, the science of the laws or principles (of melody, harmony, rhythm, etc.) by which this art is regulated.[/color]

There are others still.

A few decades ago, I assisted at a Ron Gleason concert, at the Elisabeth Hall, South Bank. There were several reel-to-reel machines set up around the stage, and a giant banjo on a stand. The tapes turned with random synchronisation, and Mr. Gleason went from one instrument to another, now a keyboard, now a guitar, sometimes the banjo, improvising ('composing'..?) as he went. The 'bouquet final' and climax of the piece was a spectacular kick of an empty red jerry can into the audience, which had been centre-front stage from the outset. Musician..? Rather..! Music..? To many there, certainly. To an empty hall, it would still have counted.

Edited by Dad3353
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1439549897' post='2843766']
Banging dustbin lids and shouting is not fine art.
[/quote]

To me, neither (although to some it could be, why not..?), but it is [i]music[/i], if that's what the person doing it intended. Either that or the OED is wrong. Maybe that's it..? :unsure:
Music is not always, or only, 'fine art', although it can be, of course.

Edited by Dad3353
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I am disinclined to think of DJs as musicians, you could draw an analogy with artists who produce collages. Just because the components of their work weren't originated by them doesn't mean that they're not artists. So I think I shall find a nice wide comfy bit of fence to sit on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1439542434' post='2843651']
A DJ who plays records is not a musician. [/quote]

I'd agree that a DJ who 'just' plays records isn't a musician.

However... creatively mixing two records together - resulting in a new piece of music - does qualify as musicianship IMO.

And therein lies the diversity of what it means to be a 'DJ'...

Colin who plays popular hits of the 80s at wedding receptions, fading one song in as another one ends, is not musician. He's not 'creating' music, he's broadcasting it.

Jane who plays a residency at the local nightclub, blending music 'on the fly' to create her own remixes, is a musician. She's creating new material live on stage - albeit music created using component parts made by others (akin to the 'artists collage' metaphor above).

At least that's how I draw the line with DJs :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Skol303' timestamp='1439573890' post='2844134']
I'd agree that a DJ who 'just' plays records isn't a musician.

However... creatively mixing two records together - resulting in a new piece of music - does qualify as musicianship IMO.

And therein lies the diversity of what it means to be a 'DJ'...

Colin who plays popular hits of the 80s at wedding receptions, fading one song in as another one ends, is not musician. He's not 'creating' music, he's broadcasting it.

Jane who plays a residency at the local nightclub, blending music 'on the fly' to create her own remixes, is a musician. She's creating new material live on stage - albeit music created using component parts made by others (akin to the 'artists collage' metaphor above).

At least that's how I draw the line with DJs :)
[/quote]
This. Exactly.

Jane is also quite likely to slip one or two of her own tracks (put together in her home studio) into the mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...