Is it wrong to think less of musicians, that neither play any instruments, nor write their own songs?

I don’t really think it is wrong. Unless they have some really good voices they aren’t enhancing, they aren’t really doing much. Maybe if they were dancing or their concerts were really artistic I wouldn’t put so much weight on them not writing their own stuff or playing instruments

I’m trying to think of musicians that don’t do either things though. Most I listen to at least, even modern artists, at minimum right their own stuff.

I certainly do. Also they can get “writing credits” on a song for very minor tweaks. It is my understanding that this is commonly done for marketing purposes to lend “credibility” to their image.

@gorillapaws That is true, that they get writing credits for small tweaks. The ones I listen to though, that are modern-day, definitely write more than just a minor fix-up. I think a lot more artists write their own stuff than you would think. Some of the ones that are super popular don’t though.

Kind of a mixed bag in terms of who writes their own stuff, but most artists don’t play their own instruments anymore. Not unless its a band and even then, you got certain like “boy bands” who don’t play anything.

It is of no care to me who writes or plays what. If I dig it then I dig it.

“Wrong” as in immoral? Of course not.

While I don’t enjoy much commercial pop music, I like to steer away from thinking of music as something that can be measured by the amount of effort or skill required to create the music. I either like a piece of music or I don’t. It either evokes some emotion or thought or moves something inside me, or it doesn’t.

I understand that many people, however, see music (and art in general) as something that should require some learned skill or talent that is achieved through much effort. It’s almost a way of looking at music (and art) as a science. Songs and/or musicians can be measured and compared and there can be “best” or “better”. I don’t see music or art this way at all.

They are called “vocalists”.

You can think more or less of them as you feel comfortable. It isn’t right or wrong. But that is why I have never liked groups like boys bands, or “acts” like Britney Spears. I prefer singer songwriter musicians.

I’m thinking about the Monkees from 50 years ago. The first album and TV show was all studio musicians and singers. All the Monkees were actually musicians and singers. But the musical supervisor wanted to use studio musicians and Boyce and Hart

I would think not. Any talent-less hack can call themselves a musician.
Doesn’t mean we have to agree.

Why would it be wrong? Some people excel at singing. Others excel at writing. Other excel at playing an instrument.

That’s like asking – should you think less of a children’s author because he/she doesn’t do his/her own illustrations?

Of course not.

@elbanditoroso
In that case it would be a children’s “author” only doing the audiobook narration, while someone else writes and illustrates it.

Expressing your own self and mind is the essence of art. This authenticity is what so often makes music so great. So while I don’t think less of these people per se, it often shows in their “music”.

It’s not “wrong”. It’s stupid.

A musician is like beauty: What it might be is in the eye of the beholder.
My father did not play any particular instrument, but he could read and write music.

I can’t believe what I’m not hearing on this topic.

A musician is by definition someone who plays a musical instrument.

A lyricist writes the words to songs.

I wouldn’t think much of a musician who didn’t play music.

So is the voice an instrument?

“So is the voice an instrument?”

Yes, absolutely.

I agree

I must be in the dark and whistling.

Another “instrument”