There are many misunderstandings about musicians. These misconceptions exist even in educated societies across the world. While they apply to artists usually, our focus here is with music.
One misconception is that the musician needs to be a "starving artist" and live a poor lifestyle. Music, just like every other occupation, has those who succeed financially and people who don't and those in between. You see wealthy pop and rock stars and you see buskers with jars on the street. Monetary success is unbiased of expertise, and not essentially explicit to anyone trade either.
An fascinating thing to note is that music itself is actually a comparatively costly industry as far as professional musicians are concerned. Instruments and other tools plus their upkeep and also areas may be quite costly. Quality lessons, a vital investment, aren't precisely cheap. All companies have their overhead and working expenses. And doing music vocationally falls into this category, due to this fact it requires correct business acumen and wonderful monetary planning to ensure solvency and viability. And dion todd
there are certainly professional musicians in this world who aren't "starving" and doing just fine.
One other false thought is that musicians have to be somewhat loopy or unstable, and this has by some means grow to be associated with talent. Expertise stands alone and is its personal area.
Oppressive people created this false notion in an effort to maintain creativity down. Anything good, powerful and creative threatens certain people whose only intention is to destroy. This, incidentally, explains the prevalence of medication in rock music. It's all calculated. Musicians, because they're inventive and inventive, are vulnerable and sometimes targets for suppression.
Musicians, like every other human being, have emotions and feelings. Because they're underneath more judgement and analysis, equivalent to throughout competitions or academic jury exams, they become more liable to attacks by those who use that as an avenue primarily to hurt others, or by those that are simply insensitive. Contradictory evaluations between judges may also cause great confusion.
Being expressive, joyful, insouciant and humorous can all come below the heading of creativity, so this too has also been falsely related to being crazy or neurotic.
Being pretty uninhibited is mostly frowned upon in our society, where we are all anticipated to behave in a certain way, like cattle. When a musician is in a transcendental moment, he could seem somewhat loopy to a more strange person. A real example was a composer who was strolling down the road and rapidly had a spark of creativity and he started "thinking out loud" with his creative process, making rhythmic hand and body gestures. Some passersby may need thought there was something mistaken with him, not understanding that he was merely having a transcendental or inventive moment.
One common fallacy is that it is one way or the other okay for a musician to play for free. The "pay to play" concept is sadly prevalent. Would one ask a plumber to return fix the sink for free? Not if he needs to get his sink fixed. Consider it or not, an ad was positioned not too long ago in a sure classifieds part from a restaurant owner looking for a band to come back carry out at his restaurant free of charge with the inadequate alternate of "selling themselves and promoting albums". As silly as this sounds, it's all too common. Music instructors frequently get asked without spending a dime lessons. While there is nothing wrong with doing volunteer work to help deserving underprivileged people, that's different. Would one ask an accountant to do taxes totally free? Again, same principle.