please list musicians who dont like to play insttrument live on stage but they play it on studio records.

george michael-he is multi instrumentalist.he plays all instruments on some of his songs .but i never seen him live with an instrument.

eros ramazzoti-best known for his duet with tina turner ,play great guitar in studio live he only sings.

michael jackson-plays keyboard ,guitar,drums in studio.his former guitar player jennifer batten said that he knows to play very good guitar,piano,drums and bass.

Flavor Flav - can play 17 instruments, not sure how many on record.

lilgish said:

Really?

That specific number reminds me of someone that used that as fluff to pad his resume.
His reasoning was that if he could get one note out of an instrument, he'd claim he could play it.



tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431

I always tend to think there's a reason these supposed instrumentalists only play "in the studio". I can see the individual being able to play well enough to lay down a chord progression - even coming up with a complete basic song, but not being able to play more than the those songs that he/she wrote. Believe me - I've seen it happen - I was in a band with a "keyboardist" who could go crazy on the songs he/she wrote, but couldn't come up with a decent part for my songs, nor was this person able to play covers or solo competently on his/her chosen instrument. It was VERY frustrating, as we found ourselves in situations that required a good keyoboardist with a good ear...

And don't ask this person to improvise...

What's funny is that this person had the whole look/image thing goin' on, but couldn't play "outside of the studio" to save his/her life.

I haven't played a proper live gig in years, just parties.

However, I do have another project where I sing and I am putting together a band for that right now.

But for my instrumental stuff, check the sig. I think some of you may like this stuff... it's me just stretching out on different instruments...mostly funky.


.
[Edited 8/5/06 23:27pm]

theAudience said:

I'm suspicious of someone if they claim to play 3 instruments. I heard a musician from India say once that it takes three lifetimes to master playing one. That sounds about right to me.

I'd love to see Michael Jackson play guitar on stage. Wouldn't care to see him play keyboard, and I would love to see him play drums but he'd be hidden up the back of the stage, and Michael Jackson should never be hidden up the back of anywhere, let alone a stage
[Edited 8/6/06 1:52am]

heartbeatocean said:

I play guitar, saxophone, piano, bass and drums well and i can sing a bit, too.

Forgive me if I sound arrogant, but you some of you guys in this forum are so pathetically mainstream, getting so amazingly worked up over the POSSIBILITY of Michael Jackson playing a note of piano while there are relative unknowns like me, if I do say myself, who could whip the pants off guys like that. Michael is a SINGER, and a great dancer, but not a musician by any stretch of the imagination.




.
[Edited 8/6/06 2:05am]

heartbeatocean said:

No way. I once asked a guy I know, who has been playing music for 45 years and teaches about 100 people per week, about how you can tell if you can play an instrument. He said his defiition of the ability to play and instrument is being able to make a sound and being able to play all the notes (and doing this well, mind you). And he defined mastering an instrument as being able to improvise/solo on that instrument. So under that definition, I have mastered atleast 4 instruments (drums, piano, guitar and bass) and can play a further 4 (trumpet, trombone, saxaphone and clarinet).

Vocals are different. Vocal mastery, I guess, would be defined by how big your range is, how well you use your voice, your ability to sing in pitch. I only have a 3 octave range, but I have an advantage as I am what is called "pitch perfect". I can sing any note without hearing it first on a piano or tuner. So I'm not really sure if I have mastered singing or not.

mrdespues said:

I was curious about Michael Jackson's ability to play instruments when I heard that he plays guitar, keyboard and drums on some of his records. So I checked out the songs he was credited for. If it really is him playing the instruments he is credited for and the songs he is crediting for playing them on, then he is a very good instrumentalist IMO. I've worked with some really great musicians who would struggle to play as well as Michael Jackson plays on the songs he is credited for (giving him the benefit of the doubt that the credits are correct and not just made up to make him look good).

DarlingDiana said:

never underestimate the power of technology. it is possible to make anyone sound like a genius in the studio.

record him live and unedited and i guarantee you you will be severely disappointed.

michael is no player.

while i have enjoyed some of "his" music (i credit his best work mainly to quincy though, to be honest), his main talent is as a master manipulator and he is improved greatly by studio tricks/the producers around him. sure he is also a good melodicist and singer, but it ends there.

i have played the instruments i mentioned for 20 years. without wanting to sound bigheaded, this is my work and i always find it laughable when people try to explain that michael "plays instruments", too. he does not, to any level of proficiency. nevermind flava flav.



.
[Edited 8/6/06 2:46am]

Hey mrdespues, checked out your stuff. Good work, but your timing is a bit sloppy. And you're not a sax player really; you haven't got much of a tone.

A musician to me is someone who plays in context, does not playing a bloody solo over the singer and has a excellent sense of rhythm. I would not assess someone as a musician on soloing ; but being able to follow a song by ear would indicate a high degree of musicality.

Vocal "mastery" has nothing to do with range. To me, it's all about that person having a high degree of vocal control (smooth vibrato, for example). But even then, there are some voices out there which adhere to no technique at all; but if they touch me in some way, it works.

Mong said:

which sax recording did you listen to?

listen to this and tell me i don't have a good tone!

http://www.soundclick.com...88814&q=hi



.
[Edited 8/6/06 4:37am]

mong, please note that the "mrdespues" stuff is not my main work, it is a side-project to goof around on and it is partly intentionally sloppy...

the john phillip stuff is my main work.

DarlingDiana said:

Perhaps I have higher standards than most and I come from a classical tradition, which is very, very, very difficult to master. I also play violin and where it can take years of practice to even start playing certain notes (5th position, 7th position) or to simply hold the bow correctly. Only an advanced player (ten years of playing) can attempt vibrato. And don't talk to me about playing double octave runs in tune.

On the other hand, instruments like piano and drums are more accessible as you can simply sit down and get a sound out of them with no experience. But even those who claim to have mastered "keyboards", I'd be curious to hear if they could pull off the Rachmaninoff concerto, for example.

I know a guy who pretty much plays every instrument brilliantly. I first met him when he was about 13 and he surpassed his piano teacher in a matter of months and didn't need lessons anymore. Now he's 27 and has ambitions to compose film scores. I saw him on TV this year when he popped up unexpectedly playing the cello for France at the Eurovision Song Conest

It's standard for music majors, regardless of specialty, to also be trained on piano so they can compose using harominc and melodic elements in western classical theory. Jazz studies departments require this. It's possible to test out to avoid the formal instruction requirement, but facility on piano is a minimum requirement. Guitar also meets this same requirement. So I automatically assume cats can double up if need be. Usually, though, a specialist in piano is gonna blow the sax or bass player away.

Obviously, if you're self-taught, you'll learn what you need to know (though not necessarily what you're supposed to know) on a particular instrument.

I had a listen; I'm sorry, but I still stick to my initial assessment on your sax playing. There's no warmth to your tone.

Two friends of mine are what I would call proper multi-instrumentalists; they are absolutely sickeningly good on guitar, keys, bass and drums. One also plays the sax (amazing on it) and the other also plays the violin/fiddle and tinwhistle, as well as being a superb singer. They can solo their asses off but they hardly ever do; they completely understand that a lot of what makes a good musician is using space, and can play within any contemporary style. The fact that neither of them gets much recording/touring work at the moment is beyond me. Then again, they're not really the bragging type; maybe that's their problem.

When you pick up a instrument and you strum/finger some chords, guess what?
you are playing a instrument.

Some of you people I swear... you think someone has to play Andre Segovia to be considered a musician. Which no one ever says you have to be a master to play a instrument. Does Emmylou Harris play guitar? Yes, she does. But she can only play some rhythmic figures but she always had a damn guitar in her hands. Because no one could compliment her vocals like her guitar.

John Lee Hooker knew 4 chords but somehow he knew how to be a pioneer of the bluesw with his electric delta hoodoo.


So with that said, it's all perspective who plays and who doesn't.
And it doesn't matter if you can play with a lydian mode with your anus
[Edited 8/6/06 13:16pm]

heartbeatocean said:

Mastery of a instrument is all dependent on a genre or a musical format. You can probably play circles around Gatemouth Brown on Classical Violin/Guitar. But he could have dust you on Texas Country Swing without any sweating with a pipe in his mouth to boot.

And that is the difference between masters. It's dependent on a genre and the overall ability of that particular musician. Not whether he can play Vulcanian chords or composition that someone takes a fancy to. It's dependent on his ability for what he/she does. Not what a music teacher thinks. The simple answer is: If he/she moves the audience and his musician peers. He's a master at what he/she plays. This is why alot classical musicians nosedive because they don't know how to get a audience to emote a energetic reaction.


It's not about asking a teacher who you think is a jedi what mastery of a instrument is. Robert Johnson was a "master" of the Slide Guitar.
It's not your standards it's your perspective on what a "master" is and can be.


We go back in time we go see Robert Johnson on his porch and you pull out a guitar? You are getting dusted... he's gonna dust you with no questions asked.
With no more than 3 chords... That's a master


"WHOOO'S THE MASSTER" (SHO'Nuff of Last Dragon)

Trickology said:

I have no doubt about that.

Mong said:

why should i listen to a non-musician on the internet who obviously has some bias towards his friends? i shouldn't and i don't.

i've been playing for 20 years... have done the exams, toured different countries as a soloist, attended the Sydney conservatorium for several years and teach. i ALWAYS get complimented on my tone, be it classical or jazz and i am best at jazz. when you're talking a lack of warmth, you may be really hearing some not so great production.... these are home recordings...no great hardware to bring out my real tone. also, you do realise that myspace and the like has notoriously bad sound quality, don't you?

i have never had anyone ever criticise my tone; this is a first and quite surprising. my tone is what i get praise for most... some great musicians (ever heard of Don Burrows?) have told me i have one of the best tones they've heard. i will admit these recordings do not do me justice. they're all i have right now as i cannot afford studio time.

but, whatever.





.
[Edited 8/6/06 22:02pm]

Trickology said:

Playing lydian modes with your anus aside - let's keep this at a mature level - it isn't just "all perspective who plays and who doesn't". As someone who plays professionally and has had the experience of hiring music teachers to teach, a technical understanding of music/playing techniques IS required. There are absolutes in music. Some musicians are more talented than others.

Now,in a subjective sense, it all depends on one what one wants out of music. Some people want to emulate a John Lee Hooker. Some want to emulate a Joe Satriani. As Steve Vai once commented, (can't paraphrase), it took Keith Richards no time at all to master the guitar. It took Vai much longer. It depends on one's particular goals.

Mong said:

So, everyone's a critic...That's a pretty callous/cold statement to make about his tone. Sheesh...

Besides, who gives a f**k about your friends

theAudience said:

well i heard flava play the drums on 'the surreal life' and it was awful, he really thought he was doin something , so i don't know how true that is.

JesseDezz said:

I'm sure there are people who can emote and whip up a crowd (Sid Vicious did it) but I was referring to mastering a certain technique as well. For me, being able to play an instrument includes being able to fulfill the instrument's potential or at least a good portion of it and doing it well. Until you reach that point, you're learning to play the instrument and you certainly haven't mastered it.

Why are u hating on mjs abilities.Just because its mj (and hes not supposed to be in this realm of musicianship)you undermine his ability, crediting it to technology. Its incredible his talent is so unbeliavable that it cant even be believed.lol.

Mjs best and most creative album was dangerous which was non quincy jones. Quincy was just the producer, a'lot of artist have producers idk why quincy jones gets this golden pass.If those albums werent successful nobody would even be saying that. All of mjs albums are good because of the talent of Michael Jackson, his premeir songs were written and composed by him

shakira

tabla ( arabic drum) although she played 4 a min or so with other instruments i have never heard her alone

mrdespues said:

Yeh, I'm not sure about some of what you said. Mainly that you credit his best work to Quincy. I really, really have my doubts about how much work Quincy did of OTW, Thriller and Bad. He's a jazz musician, not a pop musician. He didn't really have many big pop successes until he worked with Michael Jackson. That's why I think Michael Jackson, and Michael Jackson alone was the genius behind OTW, Thriller and Bad.

I also have trouble with your statement about MJ not being an instrumentalist and it all being because of studio tricks. You don't know that. However, people who do know what he's like as an instrumentalist say he's brilliant. So, make up your mind. Listen to the people who've worked with him or your own bias instinct.

mrdespues said: