So /mu/, who do you respect more a great composer/lyricist/producer or a virtuosic player/performer?
composer. any asian kid can be chained to an instrument and be told *whipcrack* "AGAIN" but if a composer can really make you feel something, that leaves more of an impression on me. but not every shitdick musician should garner respect
I respect a great composer, a great songwriter, more than a virtuoso. I don't think any musician within the rock realm (metal and everything) is half as talented as, say, Brain Wilson.
A great composer, always. Barring a physical disability, anyone can become a virtuoso at a certain instrument. To be a great songwriter, however, you have to be born with something more special. You can't simply learn to be a great composer.
As a guitar player I understand people's attraction to the virtuoso/prodigy type. Guys like Batio and Yngwie could tell you all about music theory and how many hairs Beethoven had on each testicle, but they have no mainstream audience.
Paul Simon is not a virtuoso. He worked hard, perfected his craft, and made music that connected with people. The same goes for Bob Dylan; it doesn't matter about his voice.
For all the skillz you may have, you will never be smarter than the people listening to your music.
>you can't simply learn to be a great composer
I'd like to think most great composers got there by learning as much as they could
Let me rephrase that. They can learn about theory and how instruments work and all that, but you can't just read enough books and understand how to write music anyone gives a shit about. Composers can learn all the tools to write a shitty song, but you have to have something special to actually be able to move people with your music.
I suck at both, currently, but my aptitudes lean more towards a composer. I don't have very good dexterity or coordination, but I pick up on theory very well, and have a great ear. I also mostly feel emotion mostly through music, so I have an idea of what moves me.
Ergo, I respect a virtuoso more, since it's something I may never achieve, or at least would be very difficult for me to do.
This is exactly what I was getting at, only this quote says it much better.
You can gain many excellent tools through learning music theory and technical mastery, but it won't give you the gift of songwriting ability.
Most art is born as imitation, not innovation.
All art is imitation to some degree, but it takes originality and creativity to make it something new rather than a straight copy. Or you do it better than the person you're imitating.
The quote still stands.
"Art is imitation, creation is forever
Innovation is spontaneous, never
A lot of rappers put the work in so you could be clever
Everything is everything is everything is everything, ever"
What does a virtuoso do. play music? great.
Composers WRITE music.
Without composers there would be no virtuosos, and its through composers works that virtuosos shine. Without a flashy violin or piano concerto to play, a virtuoso aint shit.
I bet you thought that was really clever
>Without composers there would be no virtuosos, and its through composers works that virtuosos shine
this isn't necessarily true. plenty of great music was never written down. would you consider robert johnson a virtuoso?
"writing music" implies you're a composer.
But if you want to use the correct terminology of a composer as a professional score writer for orchestras and choirs etc, then yes, some popular music "virtuosos" play music that wasn't written by a trained composer.
I personally wouldn't consider someone a virtuoso if they couldn't read and write sheet music and score out their playing.
Virtuosos in the classical world can play any difficult piece with tenacity, and if they're good enough, they write their own pieces to showcase their abilities. Paganini is a great example of an actual Virtuoso Performer/Composer. I haven't seen any musicians in the band / popular music world that I would consider a virtuoso.
a good virtuoso becomes indistinguishable from a composer