Em is a great lyricist, and "Stan" for example is up there withe best rap songs of all time.

But I don't think he'd make a good musician, his voice is sometimes annoying, His singing is just ugh for example that not afraid last verse... If he had some kinda smooth voice he'd make a good rock singer... but he ain't having that upper register.

Fair enough, huh?

Stan shits on any song Eminem made in his career, it introduced a new groundbreaking genre of rap, it created the term "stan for" we all use at one point, it has a cultural influence, it has a great storyline, great lyrics and wordplay. You don't like it? You're free, but i'll appreciate it if you respect my opinion.

For the record and this goes for all the "singers" that we post on here nonstop, IF YOU DONT PLAY something and have it as part of your "work" you are not a musician, so Mariah and Whitney etc...you are NOT musicians, and spare me THE reasoning of someone that knows how to play Piano like Beyonce, or has played a little in the studio etc...that excuse, you are still NOT a musician, you are a singer, or in this case a rapper

BobGeorge909 said:

Point taken. That why I tried to stress the need for a mentor. The concepts r similar and cross trade lines. The human voice though is an instrument. One employs volumes attacks, sustains, decays, tones and notes as well. I feel they r musicians just with limited soundscapes. One doesn't have to be a multi instrumentalist to be a musician.some of the best writers can write for instruments they've never touched. I catch Whatcha sayin and I also feel that people give vocalist WAAAAY too much credit for their talents. And the talent they do have is at a mature levels but they're hails as goes and goddesses. Singers come a dime a dozen...go check you local church or kareoke bar st the appropriate time and bull find absurdly awesome sounding voices. Hell...even a shower. How, when and with whom and what r more important than the voice....the voice is easily replaceable. Soul, rltalent and vision need to come with it. With the right person, I feel that Eminem could transpose his vocal talent and penchant for phrasing and rhythms to an instrument and purpose that employs those talents. He's obscenely dedicated and usually has a surplus of Ida's about. If he stayed focus on non-vocal purpose he would take it far. Instrumental talents seem to be shunned often in the hip-hop world and its shameful.

well i agree on that the voice is "an instrument", but if thats the case then someone like a Mariah Carey would be a musician but so is Britney Spears, or Paula Abdul in that case? So it then becomes almost a throwaway term, to me a Musician is someone that is producing music in many forms and ways and brings that out of other people, so to me say someone like Steve Lukather who to most that name means nothing but he is the musician behind the biggest selling album in history "thriller" and has been the backing for alot of people, i have to give that the "musician" cred long before i say Justin Beiber is also a musician, theres got to be some kind of cred to get into this or its all a throwaway term like "genius" and "artist" and "Icon"

Aaaaagrghtggafjajgjrrrrkkkghjkdke!!!!!!!!

Okay, just wanted to get that out of my system. Musicians make music. If you can't see vocalizing as music-making--fine. Whatever. However, what is singing if it isn't making music? Is it something that's added on--so there's a piece of music (the instrumentalist contribution), and then the vocalist does something else simultaneously that's intended to be heard with it, but the two things aren't coming together into one art form? I get that someone could be running some video production at the same time as a band plays, and that that visual isn't part of the music but something additional, but I simply don't get how you can distinguish vocal and instrumental music and say one type of performer is a musician and the other isn't. Vocalist and instrumentalist--sure, they're different skillsets, different in many ways--but I don't see the argument that one gets the musician term and the other doesn't. This seems really important to some people--and I guess it is to me, too, just from a different direction.

And no, it's not because I have any real stake in the argument. I can't sing or play, and most definitely am not a musician in any form.

Now--to the original post--Eminem's really impressive in his skills, but I doubt that there's any reason to imagine that they would necessarily transfer, even if he did take the time and effort to try to develop instrumental abilities. Manipulating language and it's sounds is quite a bit different than working with sounds separate from language--besides the fact that it uses different physical components, the lack of definite "meaning" connected to the raw material that an instrumentalist has means that he'd really be working in a completely different area.

lastdecember said:

BobGeorge909 said:

Point taken. That why I tried to stress the need for a mentor. The concepts r similar and cross trade lines. The human voice though is an instrument. One employs volumes attacks, sustains, decays, tones and notes as well. I feel they r musicians just with limited soundscapes. One doesn't have to be a multi instrumentalist to be a musician.some of the best writers can write for instruments they've never touched. I catch Whatcha sayin and I also feel that people give vocalist WAAAAY too much credit for their talents. And the talent they do have is at a mature levels but they're hails as goes and goddesses. Singers come a dime a dozen...go check you local church or kareoke bar st the appropriate time and bull find absurdly awesome sounding voices. Hell...even a shower. How, when and with whom and what r more important than the voice....the voice is easily replaceable. Soul, rltalent and vision need to come with it. With the right person, I feel that Eminem could transpose his vocal talent and penchant for phrasing and rhythms to an instrument and purpose that employs those talents. He's obscenely dedicated and usually has a surplus of Ida's about. If he stayed focus on non-vocal purpose he would take it far. Instrumental talents seem to be shunned often in the hip-hop world and its shameful.

well i agree on that the voice is "an instrument", but if thats the case then someone like a Mariah Carey would be a musician but so is Britney Spears, or Paula Abdul in that case? So it then becomes almost a throwaway term, to me a Musician is someone that is producing music in many forms and ways and brings that out of other people, so to me say someone like Steve Lukather who to most that name means nothing but he is the musician behind the biggest selling album in history "thriller" and has been the backing for alot of people, i have to give that the "musician" cred long before i say Justin Beiber is also a musician, theres got to be some kind of cred to get into this or its all a throwaway term like "genius" and "artist" and "Icon"

But "musician" is a completely different kind of term than "genius" or "icon" (though it really should be paralelled to "artist"--except that people have messed that word up so you can't just use it the way you should be able to)--"musician" isn't a value judgment, it's a descriptor of what someone's work is. A musician makes music. An artist makes art. Whether the music is ultimately of value is beside the point--or should be. Obviously Lukather is a musician, and I'm not going to say Bieber is greater--but whether you use the term musician for Mariah or you use the term singer, you've still got the comparison to Britney and Paula--and the question comes down to quality of their work as singers, not whether one is and one isn't a singer. Same with musician.

That is an interesting thought. Maybe a guitarist should emulate his or other rapper's flow to see what it would sound like. On a side note, I think Method Man would be a on the one funk guitarist.

lastdecember said:

NDRU said:

lastdecember said:

well i agree on that the voice is "an instrument", but if thats the case then someone like a Mariah Carey would be a musician but so is Britney Spears, or Paula Abdul in that case? So it then becomes almost a throwaway term, to me a Musician is someone that is producing music in many forms and ways and brings that out of other people, so to me say someone like Steve Lukather who to most that name means nothing but he is the musician behind the biggest selling album in history "thriller" and has been the backing for alot of people, i have to give that the "musician" cred long before i say Justin Beiber is also a musician, theres got to be some kind of cred to get into this or its all a throwaway term like "genius" and "artist" and "Icon"

Britney Spears is a musician; she's just not a good one

Well, yes--I tried to say that, just not very briefly or well.

NDRU said:

lastdecember said:

well i agree on that the voice is "an instrument", but if thats the case then someone like a Mariah Carey would be a musician but so is Britney Spears, or Paula Abdul in that case? So it then becomes almost a throwaway term, to me a Musician is someone that is producing music in many forms and ways and brings that out of other people, so to me say someone like Steve Lukather who to most that name means nothing but he is the musician behind the biggest selling album in history "thriller" and has been the backing for alot of people, i have to give that the "musician" cred long before i say Justin Beiber is also a musician, theres got to be some kind of cred to get into this or its all a throwaway term like "genius" and "artist" and "Icon"

Britney Spears is a musician; she's just not a good one

then so is Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton who both have made "music" attempts and released singles and albums

lastdecember said:

BobGeorge909 said:

lastdecember said:

then so is Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton who both have made "music" attempts and released singles and albums

U r correct. And no need for the "..."'s, though I get whatcha mean. Adjective work better than the "..."'s. Its shitty music and they're shitty musicians...but yes...musicians. When I was 12 I played saxophone. I wasn't good at it either. I knew what the bj otes were I knew the fingerings and an ambechure(sp?) decent enough to get the notes out. I was a musician. And untalented musician. An inexperienced musician. A green musician. And I played music. Simple music. Uncomplaced tunes. Emotionless music. Simply arranged music. Adjectives...don't b scurrrd of them. Negative adjectives work better than ignoring the correct noun.

^Precisely. All human beings btw are born natural philosophers, natural scientists, and natural artists.

Fuck whatever construct you give to differentiate and distinguish yourself from another human being, reduce it to children. All children are creative, and effortlessly create: songs, drawings, play-do sculpture, they love to dance and sing, they enjoy a good play and to play pretend(acting). they love laughing and joking. THEY ARE ARTISTS. Art/Music/whatever you like to call it is fundamentally an expression of the Human Condition. It is not some pretentious craft resigned for the selected few. Yes few have prodigious talent, but EVERYONE has ideas; creative ideas are what make the world go round, and I dare say you need creativity and imagination more in the sciences than you do in the arts. To think contrary is absurd.

[Edited 10/19/13 10:01am]

lastdecember said:

NDRU said:

lastdecember said: Britney Spears is a musician; she's just not a good one

then so is Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton who both have made "music" attempts and released singles and albums

Are you really saying Mariah Carey is just as "not a musician" as Paris Hilton or KK just because they both don't play instruments? Bringing those two into it makes it seem like you're saying more about the quality of the music, or the person's committment to music.

And while I don't 100% agree with that criteria, I can definitely see using it to determine who is really is a musician. And with Britney, one difference is that she is known for her music as much as her body. Also Janet Jackson, who I also don't think is amazingly talented. They are musicians, where KK and PH are rich whores who have dabbled in vanity projects

[Edited 10/19/13 10:15am]

NDRU said:

lastdecember said:

then so is Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton who both have made "music" attempts and released singles and albums

Are you really saying Mariah Carey is just as "not a musician" as Paris Hilton or KK just because they both don't play instruments? Bringing those two into it makes it seem like you're saying more about the quality of the music, or the person's committment to music.

And while I don't 100% agree with that criteria, I can definitely see using it to determine who is really is a musician. And with Britney, one difference is that she is known for her music as much as her body. Also Janet Jackson, who I also don't think is amazingly talented. They are musicians, where KK and PH are rich whores who have dabbled in vanity projects

[Edited 10/19/13 10:15am]

Its both things, if we are going to say that a singer is a musician, then dedication and committment is another subjective thing and people are gonna have different ideas of who should be called this or that, it either is or isnt. As far as committment true a paris hilton or an eddie murphy etc.."dabbled" in music, but i can argue that most of todays talent Dabbles in music by putting out a record every 4 years, so wouldnt they also fall into that category, just because paris or kk suck as singers that isnt the discussion, i wouldnt label them musicians but if singing gets you that label then they are.

lastdecember said:

NDRU said:

Are you really saying Mariah Carey is just as "not a musician" as Paris Hilton or KK just because they both don't play instruments? Bringing those two into it makes it seem like you're saying more about the quality of the music, or the person's committment to music.

And while I don't 100% agree with that criteria, I can definitely see using it to determine who is really is a musician. And with Britney, one difference is that she is known for her music as much as her body. Also Janet Jackson, who I also don't think is amazingly talented. They are musicians, where KK and PH are rich whores who have dabbled in vanity projects

[Edited 10/19/13 10:15am]

Its both things, if we are going to say that a singer is a musician, then dedication and committment is another subjective thing and people are gonna have different ideas of who should be called this or that, it either is or isnt. As far as committment true a paris hilton or an eddie murphy etc.."dabbled" in music, but i can argue that most of todays talent Dabbles in music by putting out a record every 4 years, so wouldnt they also fall into that category, just because paris or kk suck as singers that isnt the discussion, i wouldnt label them musicians but if singing gets you that label then they are.

By your terms the following people aren't musicians also:

-Frank Sinatra

-Billie Holiday

-Michael Jackson

-Pavarotti

-Ma rainey

-Bessie Smith

-Barry White

-Nat King Cole

-Madonna

-Holland-Dozier Holland

-Burt bacharach

None of these people could play an instrument in the way you perceive it, but many of them were PIVOTAL to the shape and form of future American Music, Pop Music, and World Music in general.

CynicKill said:

LOL!!! you have to be taken seriously to be tooken seriously.

His sound dont have the abaility to be taken as such just as any kid groups work is looked over upon despites massive sales. No one is going to write books about Spice Girls, N*Sync, New Edition, New Kids etc. body of work as a serious piece of art.

Sandino said:

lastdecember said:

Its both things, if we are going to say that a singer is a musician, then dedication and committment is another subjective thing and people are gonna have different ideas of who should be called this or that, it either is or isnt. As far as committment true a paris hilton or an eddie murphy etc.."dabbled" in music, but i can argue that most of todays talent Dabbles in music by putting out a record every 4 years, so wouldnt they also fall into that category, just because paris or kk suck as singers that isnt the discussion, i wouldnt label them musicians but if singing gets you that label then they are.

By your terms the following people aren't musicians also:

-Frank Sinatra

-Billie Holiday

-Michael Jackson

-Pavarotti

-Ma rainey

-Bessie Smith

-Barry White

-Nat King Cole

-Madonna

-Holland-Dozier Holland

-Burt bacharach

None of these people could play an instrument in the way you perceive it, but many of them were PIVOTAL to the shape and form of future American Music, Pop Music, and World Music in general.

my point is that if you label them "musicians" then you open the door to alot of other people who just are the singer, if you want to call everyone who sings a musician then the merit cant be "if your a good singer" or "if you are dedicated" because then its all perception and the theory just like "artist" goes out the window, thats what im saying. Im not saying that Pavorotti and Justin Beiber are the same talent, but if you rule one a musician then the other is too. If its a talent contest than again this all comes down to preference of the person. I hear "musician" and honestly im not thinking Frank Sinatra, but thats not taking away from what he did, and changed and doors opened etc.... Would we then consider Jackie Gleason a musician? though he didnt play he conducted and organized all those themes to his shows? is in fact a musician too? There has to be consistency is all im saying if Jimmy Page is a musician than so is Rihanna, and Billie Holiday and Kesha, and if its gonna come down to preference and who sucks and this and that then the term "musician" is really pretty much a wasted tag that anyone gets.

lastdecember said:

Sandino said:

By your terms the following people aren't musicians also:

-Frank Sinatra

-Billie Holiday

-Michael Jackson

-Pavarotti

-Ma rainey

-Bessie Smith

-Barry White

-Nat King Cole

-Madonna

-Holland-Dozier Holland

-Burt bacharach

None of these people could play an instrument in the way you perceive it, but many of them were PIVOTAL to the shape and form of future American Music, Pop Music, and World Music in general.

my point is that if you label them "musicians" then you open the door to alot of other people who just are the singer, if you want to call everyone who sings a musician then the merit cant be "if your a good singer" or "if you are dedicated" because then its all perception and the theory just like "artist" goes out the window, thats what im saying. Im not saying that Pavorotti and Justin Beiber are the same talent, but if you rule one a musician then the other is too. If its a talent contest than again this all comes down to preference of the person. I hear "musician" and honestly im not thinking Frank Sinatra, but thats not taking away from what he did, and changed and doors opened etc.... Would we then consider Jackie Gleason a musician? though he didnt play he conducted and organized all those themes to his shows? is in fact a musician too? There has to be consistency is all im saying if Jimmy Page is a musician than so is Rihanna, and Billie Holiday and Kesha, and if its gonna come down to preference and who sucks and this and that then the term "musician" is really pretty much a wasted tag that anyone gets.

Well, sure there is a grey area in a lot of peoples' minds as to what is a real musician vs just some schmuck who gets paid to be on a record.

But if you are a Pavarotti and you can read music and know scales and music theory (I have no idea if he could or not, but many singers do) then I don't really see how you are not a musician but Bruce Willis is because he plays the harmonica

lastdecember said:

Sandino said:

By your terms the following people aren't musicians also:

-Frank Sinatra

-Billie Holiday

-Michael Jackson

-Pavarotti

-Ma rainey

-Bessie Smith

-Barry White

-Nat King Cole

-Madonna

-Holland-Dozier Holland

-Burt bacharach

None of these people could play an instrument in the way you perceive it, but many of them were PIVOTAL to the shape and form of future American Music, Pop Music, and World Music in general.

my point is that if you label them "musicians" then you open the door to alot of other people who just are the singer, if you want to call everyone who sings a musician then the merit cant be "if your a good singer" or "if you are dedicated" because then its all perception and the theory just like "artist" goes out the window, thats what im saying. Im not saying that Pavorotti and Justin Beiber are the same talent, but if you rule one a musician then the other is too. If its a talent contest than again this all comes down to preference of the person. I hear "musician" and honestly im not thinking Frank Sinatra, but thats not taking away from what he did, and changed and doors opened etc.... Would we then consider Jackie Gleason a musician? though he didnt play he conducted and organized all those themes to his shows? is in fact a musician too? There has to be consistency is all im saying if Jimmy Page is a musician than so is Rihanna, and Billie Holiday and Kesha, and if its gonna come down to preference and who sucks and this and that then the term "musician" is really pretty much a wasted tag that anyone gets.

Nope, not a wasted tag--just one that describes what they do, not their quality. I might make a distinction between the people who just arrange and compose and those who actually "make the sounds," but whether they make sounds by vibrating vocal cords and moving air through their throat and mouth or whether they vibrate strings or a membrane or push the air on through some tube (or, let's face it, use some electronic device that does it through more indirect means)--I don't care. They made the sound, and if the sound is organized in such a way that it's considered music, then the person who made it is a musician. If they got paid for it, they're a professional musician. If the music they make influences the way music is made, they're probably an important musician (in some senses). People can debate until we all pass out (or pass on) whether they're good or not--but none of that has to do with the question of whether someone is a musician. The same applies to terms like actor, writer, director--some might have greater artistic significance or value than others, but the basic job descriptor doesn't change, even if you find the person embarassingly bad at their job or even find the work they do active corrosive to the art form.

Yes, there's a lot of people who are musicians, and using that basic term as a distinction between them is meaningless--it's properly used to distinguish between those who make music and those who don't (or possibly between those who make music as their primary or one of their primary occupations and those who don't). It means nothing beyond that, without some sort of adjective attached to it. And since we're talking about artistic endeavor here, many of those adjectives are subjective, and that's just the way it is.