Composers who are non musician

Andy - I may be wrong about Berlioz.

Composers who are not musicians is like apples which are not fruits. Composers are musicians. The correct title would be Composers who are not instrumentalists.

Seconded.

Both groups should be musicians, obviously. They deal with music.

Like someone who writes a script for a film is part of the film industry just like the actor is, regardless if none of them actually film anything themselves (the camera man is also part of the film industry, as are all the other people that are needed to get it done.) "Musician" has to be a very broad category or it makes no sense.

Plus if a composer isn't a musician, what the hell is he then? Plus you can also argue that anyone can play an instrument, just what is being talked about is the proficiency at playing it, so in that sense EVERYONE is a scrafty instrumentalist, etc etc, making everyone a musician. Labels are retarded :>

Labels are retarded :>

Agreed.

Apparently, yours and mine differ slightly - however, I can't dispute any of your above points.

:P

SSC, you make a lot of sense there.

But what ABOUT composers who aren't considered "people who regularly play an instrument?"

You don't have to be able to play an instrument to be a musician. It's that simple..a musician is someone who makes music, be it a performer or a composer.

I don't see a problem if a composer isn't good at playing any instrument. It doesn't mean they can't write for them, that depends on their knowledge OF the instrument, not their ability to play it.

I don't see a problem if a composer isn't good at playing any instrument. It doesn't mean they can't write for them, that depends on their knowledge OF the instrument, not their ability to play it.

Well, that just about sums it up.

Thank you for finally seeing and agreeing upon what I showed with simple words in just two lines, but you prefered to jump into "words of advice" or what not instead of digging a bit deeper and understanding what I imply... until SSC helped you with the digging. What happened demonstrated once again a popular trait of the majority of humankind, but that's another topic.

I do agree with km7, I should have clearly define my post.

Andy - I may be wrong about Berlioz.

Yes, you are. :P

He played the guitar well and the flute too. He knew how to use a piano, but was terribly limited, maybe even more than Wagner.

And yes, one doesn't need to play an instrument to be familiarized with it. Berlioz was an awesome orchestrator and he knew all the nuances and details of the instruments of the orchestra based solely on observation and hanging around with instrumentalists. He never played any other instruments (besides the timpani in some of his works when he wasn't conducting).

I don't see a problem if a composer isn't good at playing any instrument. It doesn't mean they can't write for them, that depends on their knowledge OF the instrument, not their ability to play it.

I'm going to agree with you on this, quite wholeheartedly.

And yes, one doesn't need to play an instrument to be familiarized with it. Berlioz was an awesome orchestrator and he knew all the nuances and details of the instruments of the orchestra based solely on observation and hanging around with instrumentalists. He never played any other instruments (besides the timpani in some of his works when he wasn't conducting).

Agreed, as well. I've spent most of my professional time as a performer as a composer/arrange as well, so I've had a lot of trial and error time, which, I can assume we all know, composers need that time to do exactly what Berlioz did and familiarize oneself with each instrument they're writing for. I play a lot of different instruments, not for the sake of playing them all well, but to have a familiarization, if not proficiency, on said instruments. The only one I claim to play well is saxophone, by the way.

But it's kind of the same concept with audio engineers: some are better equipped at being behind a mixer establishing the sound that people are going to hear both live and recorded. Some musicians are better as composers and not performers.

I said all that to say this: if one writes music, they are still a musician. They just may be more innately talented at hearing and writing the music rather than playing it.

Composers who aren't musicians. That sounds weird, but I get it. I mean, there are singers who get a career with a range of 7 notes. I don't think it's all because of sibelius and finale. I think it's partly because of supply and demand. People want music, and others write it, even if they can't read music. The other people don't know enough about music to notice, so the composer who can't read music becomes a billionaire.

I think it's not a bad thing, I just don't think it's a good thing either.

Heckelphone