Are hip hop producers really musicians?

sorry that is not a scholarly definition but a generalist definition - I reject your wikiality and suggest that you read some more on the Esthetics and Aesthetics of Music before dropping unexploded shells like the above
 
Last edited:
View attachment 41366

edit: damn it i really hate how images don't show up

agreed - unfortunately the attach system doesn;t render that anywhere near legible

so try this instead

41366d1390019594-hip-hop-producers-really-musicians-class.jpg


i.e. [img]https://www.futureproducers.com/forums/attachments/rap-hip-hop-r-b/41366d1390019594-hip-hop-producers-really-musicians-class.jpg[/img]

ps, how does it feel to be part of the disattached, discorporated, disembodied crew? Proud member since 1978 :)
 
Last edited:
Lol now the dictionary is wrong? Oh shit lol. I used my Mac dictionary and damn near the same exact shit came up. I guess Siri is wrong too.
Lol you guys are hilarious.

music |ˈmyoōzik|
noun
1 the art or science of combining vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion : he devoted his life to music.
• the vocal or instrumental sound produced in this way : couples were dancing to the music | baroque music.
• a sound perceived as pleasingly harmonious : the background music of softly lapping water.
2 the written or printed signs representing such sound : Tony learned to read music.
• the score or scores of a musical composition or compositions : the music was open on a stand.
 
Last edited:
no, you are just blinkered

the following suggests just how blinkered you are

20th-century composer John Cage thought that any sound can be music, saying, for example, "There is no noise, only sound." (http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/47403.John_Cage, http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Cage, http://www.deconstruction-in-music....age/316_cage_and_silence/cage_and_silence.htm,

)

Musicologist Jean-Jacques Nattiez summarizes the relativist, post-modern viewpoint: "The border between music and noise is always culturally defined—which implies that, even within a single society, this border does not always pass through the same place; in short, there is rarely a consensus ... By all accounts there is no single and intercultural universal concept defining what music might be."(Nattiez, Jean-Jacques (1990). Music and discourse: toward a semiology of music. Carolyn Abbate, translator. Princeton University Press. pp. 48, 55. ISBN 0-691-02714-5.)
 
Last edited:
no, you are just blinkered


blinker |ˈbli ng kər|
noun
1 a device that blinks, esp. a vehicle's turn signal.
2 ( blinkers) another term for blinders (see blinder).
verb [ trans. ] (often be blinkered)
put blinders on (a horse).
• figurative cause (someone) to have a narrow or limited outlook on a situation : college education blinkers researchers so that they see poverty in terms of their own specialization.


I got this from Siri too, guess you disagree cause its not from these scholars you speak of.
 
Yeah using Wiki is fun. Your man Nattiez broke it down even simpler than that in a table, enjoy...lol

Table describing types of definitions of music (Nattiez 1990, 46):

poietic level
(choice of the composer)
neutral level
(physical definition)
esthesic level
(perceptive judgment)
musicmusical soundsound of the
harmonic
spectrum
agreeable sound
nonmusicnoise
(nonmusical)
noise
(complex sound)
disagreeable
noise
 
as long as we're quoting him how about this?

However, in the view of semiologist Jean-Jacques Nattiez, "just as music is whatever people choose to recognize as such, noise is whatever is recognized as disturbing, unpleasant, or both" (Nattiez 1990, 47–48).

According to musicologist Jean-Jacques Nattiez: "The border between music and noise is always culturally defined—which implies that, even within a single society, this border does not always pass through the same place; in short, there is rarely a consensus.... By all accounts there is no single and intercultural universal concept defining what music might be" (Nattiez 1990, 47–8 and 55).

Definition of music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
no, you are just blinkered

the following suggests just how blinkered you are

20th-century composer John Cage thought that any sound can be music, saying, for example, "There is no noise, only sound." (John Cage Quotes (Author of Silence), John Cage - Wikiquote, Cage and Silence,


)

Musicologist Jean-Jacques Nattiez summarizes the relativist, post-modern viewpoint: "The border between music and noise is always culturally defined—which implies that, even within a single society, this border does not always pass through the same place; in short, there is rarely a consensus ... By all accounts there is no single and intercultural universal concept defining what music might be."(Nattiez, Jean-Jacques (1990). Music and discourse: toward a semiology of music. Carolyn Abbate, translator. Princeton University Press. pp. 48, 55. ISBN 0-691-02714-5.)



Mmmmm John Cage, one of the early pioneers of the turntable as an instrument:cheers:
 
as long as we're quoting him how about this?





Definition of music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right. And the chart he provided defining music followed all of that. The same chart featuring all the same shit I been saying all night.

*shrugs shoulders* He says its culturally defined, but HIS definition has the same shit as the general one.

The foundation of rhythm, melody, harmony are inescapable.
 
Last edited:
again you reject non-pitched forms of music because they do not meet your narrow, blinkered view of the world:



how is that not music?????

Accept that you need to evolve musically, emotionally and intellectually before you can stand by your words (you may even come to recognise that they are wrong or at least unusually narrowly constrained) ;) Also interesting that you rejected other more encompassing definitions in that same article

@infradead: thanks for the download of the Art of Noise - sure I have it somewhere but as drives die and backups get buried, always nice to find a new copy to have.....
 
Last edited:
again you reject non-pitched forms of music because they do not meet your narrow, blinkered view of the world: accept that you need to evolve musically, emotionally and intellectually before you can stand by your words (you may even come to recognise that they are wrong or at least unusually narrowly constrained) ;) Also interesting that you rejected other more encompassing definitions in that same article

@infradead: thanks for the download of the Art of Noise - sure I have it somewhere but as drives die and backups get buried, always nice to find a new copy to have.....

Lol this is mainman's table not mine. All that other shit is cool, things being subjective and all that and it cant really be defined, those are his thoughts...but the element of harmonic sound is in his definition and consistently in all those other ones. Thats defines it for him, that's what defines it for me too. If it aint there then its not music. As seen in HIS chart. YOUR man.

poietic level
(choice of the composer)

neutral level
(physical definition)
esthesic level
(perceptive judgment)
musicmusical sound
sound of the
harmonic
spectrum
agreeable sound
nonmusicnoise
(nonmusical)
noise
(complex sound)
disagreeable
noise
 
Lol this is mainman's table not mine. All that other shit is cool, things being subjective and all that and it cant really be defined, those are his thoughts...but the element of harmonic sound is in his definition and consistently in all those other ones. Thats defines it for him, that's what defines it for me too. If it aint there then its not music. As seen in HIS chart. YOUR man.

poietic level
(choice of the composer)

neutral level
(physical definition)
esthesic level
(perceptive judgment)
musicmusical sound
sound of the
harmonic
spectrum
agreeable sound
nonmusicnoise
(nonmusical)
noise
(complex sound)
disagreeable
noise

Yah but look at his explanations of it.

its broken down like this.

" By 'poietic' I understand describing the link among the composer's intentions, his creative procedures, his mental schemas, and the result of this collection of strategies; that is, the components that go into the work's material embodiment. Poietic description thus also deals with a quite special form of hearing (Varese called it 'the interior ear'): what the composer hears while imagining the work's sonorous results, or while experimenting at the piano, or with tape."

"By 'esthesic' I understand not merely the artificially attentive hearing of a musicologist, but the description of perceptive behaviors within a given population of listeners; that is how this or that aspect of sonorous reality is captured by their perceptive strategies."

The neutral level is that of the physical "trace", (Saussere's sound-image, a sonority, a score), created and interpreted by the esthesic level (which corresponds to a perceptive definition; the perceptive and/or "social" construction definitions below) and the poietic level (which corresponds to a creative, as in compositional, definition; the organizational and social construction definitions below).
Table describing types of definitions of music

and then explained like this.

Poietic Process.........................................Esthesic Process
Composer (Producer) → Sound (Trace) ← Listener (Receiver)

and then he also says this

"The border between music and noise is always culturally defined—which implies that, even within a single society, this border does not always pass through the same place; in short, there is rarely a consensus.... By all accounts there is no single and intercultural universal concept defining what music might be"

which leads me to think that what he is saying is that its subjective. it depends on the composers intent and the listeners perception. so for you its not music but for other people it is.

so that you could have a composer using non musical noises and perceived esthetically as music.
 
Last edited:
NERDS!!!!!

J/K.

I'm actually enjoying this thread.

@McLovin, even though it's the 6th definition out of the 1st dictionary link you posted, it still holds to be just as definitive as the other 5.

"6. An aesthetically pleasing or harmonious sound or combination of sounds."

What one considers aesthetic or harmonious is left to individual opinion. So to use an analogy...saying Stockhausen isn't music is EXACTLY like someone saying Rap isn't music because they recognize it as noise, which is exactly like someone saying Folk isn't music because doesn't have a rhythm I relate to. I feel like all this has already been said.

Goodnight, guys. :cheers:
 
I just confused on how the OP posted this....
[h=2]Are hip hop producers really musicians?[/h]And you all are going back and forth about the definition of music
..instead of the understood/acceptable/cultural/traditional/general DEFINITION OF MUSICIAN.

And so saying I make music therefore I'm a musician is the equivalent of making a stool and saying you're a carpenter.
I know this and everyone else knows this.

If you tell ANYONE that you're a musician, they will ask what do you play?
And you (If YOU ARE A TRUE MUSICIAN) will answer 'a keyboard or Drum Pads'.
If you don't have a clue you will name a STUDIO TOOL, like a sampler or turntable.

If you EVER use the recording of someone else, THEY are the MUSICIAN(s) and you are reinterpreting/remixing/re-contextualizing THEIR MUSIC to create YOUR music.
That does not guarantee you are a musician. You can be creative/technical/clever/skillful and still not be a musician.

The true answer is DEPENDS and that depends on HOW that 'hip hop producer' makes his music.
Not whether or not WHAT he makes is considered music.

Most of us are ELECTRONIC MUSICIANS. That is, music made with the use of electronics.
i.e. COMPUTER aided. Meaning WHAT YOU CREATE MUSIC WITH USES ELECTRICITY.

99.9% of the definitions about Musicians involve skill/talent with a musical instrument. Instrument and NOT TOOL.
Musical instruments at their root DO NOT Need electricity.
Electric Guitar --- acoustic Guitar....
Electronic Drum set --- drums.
"Drum Machine" includes the machine and the inherent PROGRAMMING.


And you know the difference between making music by playing stuff and making music by programming stuff.
And you also know how much help all your studio tools are giving you along the way and that will impact the two key words
SKILL and TALENT. And I don't mean in a subjective 'his beats are hot tho' kind of way.
I repeat: you know the difference between making music by playing stuff and making music by programming stuff.

That's why the answer is depends.
There's lots of ways to make stuff generally accepted as GREAT MUSIC without being a musician.
 
I'm no muscian, i don't make music. I bait my audience and pull them in with master pieces. I guess you could call me a masterbater.
 
Yo Kill this is a great topic you have some producers who are just Beat Makers and some who like myself who know
Art Jenkins of Sun Ra and have sat in on their sets and just soaked up their space music who are what can be
considered are a musician I consider myself a musician why because I can play a piano bass guitar drums and
trumpet and I came up in the band era and I can chop and flip samps with the best of them although I mostly
make original tracks and have played in bands since the late 80's the last band I played in was in 2013 it was
a Pop Rock band do producers have limitations when I got out there and got my feet wet I found out that Yes
I know I have some type of limitations when I come in contact with a genre of music that I don't normally hit
like Jazz fusion for example I know that I have to study Chick Correa or Stanley Clark Iam what is called an
Improv Musician and Music Producer but a master of none I just get it done.

Again great topic hats off to the panel for their input on this subject.
 
I'm no muscian, i don't make music. I bait my audience and pull them in with master pieces. I guess you could call me a masterbater.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Yo my side is cracking right now LMAOROFL:berzerk:
 
Yah but look at his explanations of it.

its broken down like this.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------








and then explained like this.



and then he also says this



which leads me to think that what he is saying is that its subjective. it depends on the composers intent and the listeners perception. so for you its not music but for other people it is.

so that you could have a composer using non musical noises and perceived esthetically as music.
---------------


So primarily would you say it's based on perception
 
Back
Top