Sharing Your Music

[zuzu]

Yes we do. Publicly? As you will. But to keep something as intimate and important to me as music locked away from my close friends and relations, without letting them have a glimpse of that inner me is reclusive and isolating, IMO. To me, that is the opposite of why we have this gift.

When you have been doing it as long as I have those close to you may not seek that side of you very often, having heard it all before. But when they do I think it is wrong to deny them. The public? Take it or leave it as you wish.

[Mandobart]

My answer is no, there is no moral obligation or responsibility for us to share our musical, handyman, culinary, artistic, organizational, gardening, expressive dance, athletic, intellectual, or other skills/gifts/talents. Many people choose to do so - some for altruistic reasons and others for selfish reasons. If the effect is the same then does the motivation make a difference?

Particularly with music, there are quite a few who share their skill primarily to feed their ego. Others do it as a need for self-expression. Does the audience care either way? Can they tell the difference?

Rhetorically, as this question can lead to a quickly locked thread - if one thinks we are "morally obligated" to do something we enjoy and would do anyway (like play music for others' entertainment), how much more obligated are we to do the hard things we may not enjoy that people really need: their physical well-being (food, housing, childcare, healthcare, etc.)?

[Bluenose]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

No, but putting music into the world makes it a better place.

Ok call me a grumpy, old, whatever but if I'm sitting on a park bench I would much rather listen to the birds singing than a 3 chord wonder banging out his repertoire of old country rock songs but that's just me I guess.

[Monty Christo]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jelly

Do we have a responsibility or obligation to share what we do as musicians?

To whom would we be obligated?

[rllink]

I don't think we are obligated, but for me it is a very big part of why I play guitar and sing. But that's just my journey, it is just music, do with it what you want. I will admit though that I'm a bit of an evangelist when it comes to inviting people who don't to come play with me when I'm going to be out and about.

[FrankHudson]

Interesting question with a lot of facets.

I've been planning, then doing my Parlando Project for around 9 years. I've made public well over 700 pieces as part of that. I composed the music for the large majority of them, and played at least one instrument on nearly all of the recordings. I've written the lyrics for a smallish minority of those pieces, but not most, because the Parlando Project is about using other people's words (mostly literary poetry) and finding ways that music might illuminate them.

Even if I was to rank the Parlando Project pieces myself, they're good, bad, and indifferent, but I felt compelled to do it because I like what poetry & music combined can do. Many of my pieces have no other musical settings, some of them use poems and poets that are little known. I'm not the best musician or composer that ever lived, but I'm the best some of them got.

Now that's a self-taken-on obligation. It's not like parenthood or Golden Rule stuff. But I think that's an honorable class of obligation none-the-less.

That said, here's something that bothers me when I think about it. I have no desire to run a small business. I admire those who do, but it's not me. I not only don't charge for streaming my musical pieces, I don't even want to consider the overhead of doing so -- and besides, the point of my Project is to pleasingly educate the listeners: poetry you can dance or sing along to. I even post simple chord sheets for some of the pieces, like OG folk revival publications used to, urging others to give their own go at singing the songs.

What bothers me. Working musicians have a hard time making a minimum wage living these days. Good musicians included. Songwriters too. A significant part of the reason for that is the field is flooded with inexpensive ways to hear more music than anyone can possibly absorb.

Some might even posit a sort of musical Gresham's law: the flood of mediocre music, even if doesn't exactly "drive out" the good high-quality stuff, obscures it, gives it less of the pie.

It occurs to me: I'm part of that. When the music supply was smaller, it was common to hear distain for bands that would play gigs for free or even pay for play at clubs, that that made it harder for working musicians who needed that revenue. Is this more-or-less the same thing?

I don't have an answer to my self-questioning about that element of sharing my music, other than I continue to do my Project.

[b1j]

I tried a few months back: posted a Show and Tell of a song I wrote, arranged, played all the instruments and sang on, recorded, and mixed. It’s a heartfelt ode to an artist, filled with references to her work, with three main structural parts with thoughtful rhymes and meter.

Two comments (nice, granted) and then it sank like a stone.

My music is still for me, though. I’m working on an ambitious project that is guaranteed to be met with crickets. I’m excited about it.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by b1j

I tried a few months back: posted a Show and Tell of a song I wrote, arranged, played all the instruments and sang on, recorded, and mixed.

Two comments (nice, granted) and then it sank like a stone.

My music is still for me, though.

That happens.

That's why I will work on a tune only for 3 weeks to a month at the longest because I know only a few will notice it and respond. So instead of trying to get something perfect, to be ignored, I will get it decent, and then have it ignored

I've realized that just because I have the means to share music I make, it doesn't automatically make it worth sharing to the masses

[musicman1951]

I think it's a personal decision. I don't think we're obligated to share our hobbies, and if music is one of yours I don't find it offensive if you wish to keep it to yourself.

I play in church with a group of musicians that, I suspect, feel an obligation to share their gifts, although it could probably be stated as an opportunity to joyfully share rather than an obligation. I know that's the way I feel about it.

According to popular legend van Gogh only sold one painting during his lifetime. I don't think his lack of sharing - albeit somewhat forced upon him - lessened his art in any way.

[Wardo]

I have an obligation to have a good time.

[Silly Moustache]

The short answer is no. For most of us it is a hobby, and and many don't enjoy the performance aspect.

Slightly longer answer : I have seen many people put themselves under great pressure to practice, put the time in, etc. Some of my clients have apologised to me if they are struggling with something, due to job or family pressures, and I think that in the past I too have put pressure on myself like I would to achieve some work related task.

Work ethic is all fine and well, but family comes first, work comes second, and hobbies come somewhere else.

I am stage struck, being on stage is the best place for me, but my time has passed, and I doubt I'll gig again.

[Glennwillow]

Originally Posted by b1j

I tried a few months back: posted a Show and Tell of a song I wrote, arranged, played all the instruments and sang on, recorded, and mixed. It’s a heartfelt ode to an artist, filled with references to her work, with three main structural parts with thoughtful rhymes and meter.

Two comments (nice, granted) and then it sank like a stone.

My music is still for me, though. I’m working on an ambitious project that is guaranteed to be met with crickets. I’m excited about it.

I looked up your song and just now commented on it. I thought you did really well. I don't know why it missed it, but we all miss things in Show & Tell once in a while. Things get buried. I wanted you to know I really enjoyed what you did.

- Glenn

[CharlieBman]

Sharing music is great. But is it a responsibility or obligation? Absolutely not.

[Glennwillow]

I have had a few people over the years tell me that I had to get my music out to the public. This was apparently something I owed to somebody.

I always thought it was an odd thought. It's not like I had a solution to world hunger or to climate change. It's just music and there is plenty of it out there.

We each have a choice about how much of our music we want to share with others or with the world. And let's face it, when so much of music is met with total indifference, it's hard to get enthusiastic about something that takes so much effort and pays so little.

I established a YouTube channel in 2016. It's nice to have a few people like what I do with music, it's rewarding to be able to teach how to do a few things on the guitar that folks are interested in, but the primary reason for recording music and putting it out there is that it's good for me in my retirement. It gives me some sense of accomplishment and keeps me busy and motivated. If there are side benefits to others -- and in a few cases there might be -- well, I think that's great. But I don't have any illusions that I am somehow changing the world.

- Glenn

[Rosette]

Mostly no. In order for there to be an obligation, there has to be a receiving party with a need that must be fulfilled. It's a false assumption that there is a need for what everyone calling themselves a musician might share. That isn't to say anyone who wants to share their music shouldn't.

I could see some exceptions where one would feel an obligation - such as you don't like performing but your father is in hospice and has a dying wish to hear you play guitar, you would probably feel obligated.