There is actually a big difference between plotting the notes and playing the notes, even if the tune is the same and the sound produced by the computer is accurate and doesn't sound like a "generated piano" tone. A piano, or any other instrument, is not just a tool. There is an important relationship between the player and the instrument that affects how it sounds, especially things like woodwinds/brass, percussion, and stringed instruments. My brother can take my guitar and play something and then I could mimic it on the same set up, but it wouldn't sound nearly as good. He plays better than me, even really easy basic things sound better with him. There are a bunch of factors that go into producing a specific sound that is just not accomplishable by plotting an A note. This can include how hard you push air with your lungs, where your pushing it from, how you position you're hand or strum, or even how you press to the next note on a piano (this is an array of things pertaining to a bunch of different instruments). Modifying these things can have huge impact on the overall sound of a piece and really separates the weekend warriors from the professionals (not trying to discredit the weekend warrior, just saying a professional is usually a bit, or a lot, better).

Besides, have you ever noticed that not everyone can play an instrument. There is a reason. An instrument isn't simply push here and blow and therefore is different from a tool. If it were just a tool then anyone could do it as easily as using a screwdriver (twist here), a hammer (hit there), a saw (do back forth motion), or a power drill (pull trigger). Its different, even with the very basics, not everyone can play basic patterns like a seasoned player. Even if they do the motions correctly, it can still sound like crap. This is a huge distinguishing feature between a mediocre rhythm player and a professional. Even if they're playing an incredibly easy progression, the professional will sound better.

you mean like articulation, dynamics and rubato? a musical instrument is more hands on, it gives the user more direct control over the sound produced and after a good few years you can really make the tone your own. Electronic music has been trying to reproduce this, you could tweak every single note individually, it's attack, decay, dynamics and tone by hand, If I'm worried about the subtleties of the finished product I honestly find just playing it on violin to be easier and far less time consuming, if I put as many years into electronic music it would more than likely be the other way round.


Playing an instrument was mandatory when I was going through school so I'm not sure I can agree with you, it takes a lot more time to get to grips with an instrument than it does with a hammer or screwdriver but it doesn't make it any less of tool. Not everyone can master an instrument I'll give you that, but the same can be said for a lot of tools, anyone can use a hammer and chisel but it takes a lot of work to become a master joiner.

That is honestly the best post in this thread. you described what I wanted to perfectly.

Just like RezZ, rnr_loserIX totally nailed a significant part of what I was trying to say in a much more eloquent way.

For this specifically though, I'd still consider you a musician because you do have that background. My beef is when you get someone who just downloaded Fruity Loops, ACiD, and Reason, slapped together a bunch of presets, got their idiot buddies to tell them 'huh huh, that's cool, huh' and then turn around and proclaim themselves as musicians.

I understand, and actually, behave the same way in regards to describing myself to most people. Not because I think it's presumptuous to put myself on that level but because most people I meet seem to have adopted a perspective that only people who are actively seeking commercial success through their music count as musicians. I might not be a professional musician, but I'm still a musician (or at least was :shycouch:)

I've only read the first page of this thread, but I consider most electronic musicians to be composers. Sampling is one of the best things that has happened to music in recent times (in my opinion). Instead of working exclusively with an instrument, you can take sounds (from off your street, the internet, from another country), work with it, and use it in a composition. Hell, you can take sounds of sex (something extremely personal) and turn it into music.

I'd consider people who create electronic music to be musicians and composers.

However, they're not instrumentalists.

That's a stance I can agree with.

Well anyone who creates any type of music is a musician

Depends on what one considers music.

The definition of music has been challenged, and debated to death. To me, noise can be music, and no one has any right to tell me otherwise. People always call me pretentious, but I get "that's not music" response a lot when I share things that I like. I tell them that saying something can't be music is more pretentious than saying something can be music. It's aggravating how hypocritical people are about music, they can't step outside of their head for 5 minutes to see something in a different way.