Do all musicians feel this way?

Cafe Society
1

I was watching a show on Harry Connick,Jr. the other day, and during the show, two of the people they interviewed were the Marsalis brothers, Wynton and Branford (not sure if I’m spelling their names right). At one point, they were talking about how Harry went from playing instrumental jazz, to playing big band, and then “crossed over” into a different market by singing also. And one of the Marsalis brothers (not sure which one- I think it was the one who played with Sting) said something like, “Well, it’s cool, because Harry’s a musician who sings, and that’s okay, because we hate singers.”

I thought about it, and I was offended, because the implication in his sentence, to me, was that singers aren’t “real” musicians. I was a voice major in college, and I wanted to become an opera singer. I seem to remember the same type of sentiment among other musicians, I don’t remember if it was specifically the jazz majors who felt that way.

My question is, do all musicians feel that way, that a singer isn’t a “real” musician, and if so, why? Just because a singer doesn’t play an instrument? A singer’s body is their instrument! And singers have to take all the same classes that other musicians take, Music Theory, Sight Singing, private lessons, Conducting, etc. And yes, I know that a lot of singers have a “diva complex”, but then, there are musicians out there who have pretty over-inflated egos as well, and they don’t seem to get the same stigma that singers do.

So what’s the deal? Is the Marsalis dude just being a jazz snob, or are singers really looked down upon?

2

Don’t listen to anything a Marsalis says. They’re a notorious packa assholes.

The jazz musician’s disdain for singers has roots back in the swing era, when a chick singer with a tremendous pair of peaches would be hired by the leader, after she had sex with him, of course, to stand in front of the band and sing while wearing a low-cut gown.

Many singers of this period were simply eye-candy, and the guys in the band knew it. Lots of jokes about being off-key, coming in behind the beat, etc.

On the other hand, NO ONE made fun of Sarah Vaughan or Anita O’Day. To mention only two who not only looked good but had the chops to cut any boy in the band, if she wanted to.

3

Howyadoin,

I get the impression from rock guitarists and drummers that they perceive singers as slackers, for the following reasons…

It is a given that most good guitarists (for example) practice 3-4 hours a day, every day, to maintain their level of skill, where in some cases a vocalist does not. In reality, if a rock vocalist sings 4 hours a day, he or she is putting a real strain on their vocal cords. IANA opera singer, so I won’t speak to that.

Most guitarists are more versed in music theory than vocalists, in my experience. Also, many guitarists are immersed in their gear. A vocalist doesn’t generally get too involved in equipment other than PA or mixing. Again this is from personal experience, and may not necessarily reflect someone else’s reality.

-Rav

4

It’s partly a long-standing joke. It’s also partly true. Let’s face it, a singer generally has a far smaller range than the other musicians s/he plays with. So the band has to change how they play to match the singer’s range, which can easily breed resentment if they weren’t that keen on the singer to begin with.

5

As a drummer, I’ve found that I’m usually the one who gets the “not a musician” tag (to be fair, I don’t play in a jazz band). There are plenty of jokes of the “three musicians and a drummer” variety, but most people who are into music that I’ve met consider the singer a musician.
Just a guess, but I’d bet it was Winton who made that remark. He’s easily the bigger asshole/snob of the two (called his own brother a sellout on numerous occasions).

6

Trust me, it’s even worse if you’re a chorister, as even the (vocal) soloists don’t consider you real musicians. To which I say: bite me. And we never get paid. :frowning:

7

Let’s start a band. It will be nothing but drums, turntables, a sampler and a singer. All things which people claim aren’t instruments. We’ll show 'em who the musicians are.

I guarantee a talented drummer with a turntablist and singer of equal talent could jam somethin’ awful. I think people who say theses aren’t musicians are close-minded, self-centered, crazy fools.

Dalovin’Dj

8

Just MHO, but there’s also the case that some people are born with the ability to carry a tune well, and thus are perceived to not have worked for their success. Whereas, with very few exceptions, even the most talented instrumental musicians have to practice long and hard to learn and maintain their skills.

Now I realize that many if not most vocalists are the product of intensive study and training and I respect that, but I think it’s hard to counter the idea that you either can sing, or you can’t, and work has little to do with it.

Couple this with the fact that the vocalist tends to get all of the attention, and you have a nice green envy breeding ground.

9

From my personal experiances in playing in rock and blues bands:
[list=1]
[li]Singers are considered musicians, but not to their face. We have enough ego to deal with as it is.[/li][li]To stand up in front of an audiance with no instrument to hide behind takes a lot of ego. I couldnt do it. Unfortunatlty, this means you have to deal with the ego off stage as well. I have met very few vocalists that could turn it off and not be a prick off stage.[/li][li]As a keyboardists, I have a good 5 grand invested in my gear(at least…probably more). A good guitar player can have several grand tied up in his guitars, amp, and effects. A professional drummer also can have a couple of grand tied up in drums, cymbals cases etc. Most vocalists will have maybe a $100 microphone if you are lucky. Ive been in bands where the vocalist wouldnt buy anything. Personally, I think the vocalist should buy the PA, and we would be about even, but I have only met one vocalist that did that(and he didnt sing for my band).[/li][li]Much of a singers ability is something they are born with. Two of the best vocalists, I have ever worked with had absolutely no formal training or education whatsoever. They just had a good voice and could sing. Period. Because of this, they did not have to go through the hard work and dedication other musicians go through(I know this is not true for all vocalists, especially classically trained ones). Therefore, they didnt understand the effort we had put into getting where we are now, or the effort involved in coming up with new songs, or practicing old ones. All they had to do was memorize the words and sing them.[/li][li]Maybe its because of the personality required to do it, who knows, but of all the bands I have been in, and all the musicians I have worked with, singers have been the biggest pain in the ass, have been the least proffesional, and have been the most un-reliable. I really wish I could sing, so I would not have to deal with them any more. To be fair, the worst of them have been the least educated. I have worked with some who were classically trained, and they had a much better attitude, although a tad snobish.[/li][/list=1]

10

The simple fact is that the human voice is a musical instument in itself. (And an excellent one at that I may add.)

So, by default, singers are musicians.

The guy you quoted was being a flip asshole.

11

Stoli, I agree with what you said about the idea that “you can sing, or you can’t, and work has little to do with it”. I think most people think that way, and they don’t realize that some work is involved in singing. As Raven said, a vocalist cannot practice singing for 4 hours a day like an instrumentalist can, because it would most likely hurt their voice. But when you’re being trained to sing classically/operatically, there is a lot of work that goes in to it. I did exercises to widen my range (I used to have a range of 3 & 1/2 octaves, whereas now, I don’t, because I only sing around the house anymore), I did exercises to help my breath control and support, I did exercises to make my voice more flexible. And you have to learn the notes of whatever piece you’re singing, as well as the words, and then convey the meaning of the song in your singing, which can be difficult if the song is in a different language from your own.

Maybe jazz musicians are just a buncha snobs. I remember there was ONE girl in the jazz band, and she played the electric bass. Apparently her father was a well-known jazz musician, and a lot of the other people said that the only reason she got into the band was that she had a famous father. That, or that she was in the band because she was sleeping with the leader. What a nice group! I’m glad I never got in to jazz singing. I’ll stick to listening to Ella and Billie.

12

Ike-which band leader would that be?

13

please don’t say Glenn Miller…crossing fingers…

14

I guess I would say that a singer is a musician, but in general I would refer to them as a singer or vocalist.
Its sorta like how some people say “soda” and other people say “pop”…I say Coke, Pepsi, Sprite, 7-up, Grape, or whatever else I am drinking. If someone plays guitar I call him or her a guitarist, not a musician. Now, if they play more than one instrument, and they play very musically and listen to what’s going on around them and play with tact and feeling and emotion instead of just wailing on the instrument, then I would most likely call them a musician. I guess to me “musician” is more about a mastery of what you are playing than just the fact that you play it, but I also find that playing more than one instrument helps if you want me to call you a musician. Whatever…

15

To cite an example of what ** bdgr ** was saying…

I believe it was Eddie and/or Alex Van Halen who coined the term LSD for “Lead Singer Disease.” Granted they were contending with the one of the biggest egos ever (DLR) but I think the term applies to any singer.

I also agree that the opinion of Wynton Marsalis on just about anything (excepting ways of almost single-handedly stagnating a once great art form) are not worth a pile of guano.

16

I remember a band I used to be in, where we hired a guy who had never sang with a group before. He had an incredible voice, and seemed to be a fairly ok guy. Me and the bass player kind of founded the band, and one day the bass player comes over to the house and says to my wife"Me and your husaband have done something terrible…We have created a lead singer". The guy had started to demand things…His girl friend had to be at practice, and maybe she should sing backup…and maybe we should buy him a better monitor…after all it will make the band sound better(he did buy his own microphone)…and, well, you get the picture…

17

As some other posters have hinted, I think it has a lot to do with the difference between classically trained singers and popular singers. I sing and play guitar, and I definitely sing much better than I play. A lot of that is because I have a naturally good voice and I can make a good sound wtihout much practice. My guitar playing thus suffers because I find it frustrating to have to actually practice in order to get good when my other “instrument” comes so naturally. This is probably the source of the backlash for rock singers and jazz singers. I doubt that the members of the backing orchestra feel this way about opera singers.

18

Interjection:

Correct singing does not put a strain on the vocal cords. There are ways to use the voice that do not result in damage to the apparatus, and these ways can produce any style of music that you want - you can be a ‘screamer’ and not blow your voice out. There are muscles involved, so fatigue can factor in, but strain, like pulling a muscle, only happens to people who are doing something wrong.

Re: the OP - Every ‘musician’ type has a stereotype, and associated jokes:

“How do you get a guitarist to stop playing? Put music in front of him?”
“What did the drummer get on his music theory test? Drool”
“what’s the difference between first and second violins? Half a step”
“What’s the difference between violins and violas?” Half a measure"

Said among friends, these are jokes - said with venom and they’re insults. The hard thing about answering the OP is determining if Branford was joking or not, which is a matter of inflection and context. He could be joking, because there is institutional humor in any group; all the musicians I’ve worked with eventually start poking fun at each other simply based on comfort and camaraderie, like any bunch of working friends. OTOH, B Marsalis could be perpetuating institutional bigotry, based on stereotypes.

So if he’s joking - fine - (Having seen his sense of humor, I suspect he is)
If he ain’t, ef’em - he should know better.

Kyomara, one stereotype of the Opera singer is the ‘Diva’:
“How many Divas does it take to screw in a lightbulb? One - they just hold it up and the world revolves around them”: they see the orchestra as the ‘amateurs’ that they’re ‘forced’ to work with dramatic sigh.
The other stereotype:
“What’s the difference between a seamstress and a soprano? A seamstress tucks up frills. . .” The screechy, crappy singer who THINKS she’s a Diva.
IMHE (experience) The orchestra’s attitude towards a diva is the mirror of the attitude they give back.

I won’t even MENTION tubas…

19

Yeah, you better not. Not unless you want a Double-C Four Piston Valve Contrabass up alongside yo haid.

20

Ukulele Ike is down, yo.

Dalovin’Dj