Play a note? OK, but with what sort of a sound? I can get a note out of a trumpet - an arpeggio, even, but it sounds hideous, as it does if I try out my husband's tenor viol, and no way would I say I played either instrument.

Like Kerioboe's daughter, I would distinguish between being able to play a little, and being a player of an instrument - until fairly recently I would say I played recorders and piano, now I say I play piano, but am a recorder player (and even then, I haven't got to where "it's at"). I'd not count myself as playing unless I played reasonably regularly and could produce something others would recognise as music.

I think the proof of the pudding is in whether or not somebody would enjoy listening to you! You don't need to be playing something 'hard' for it to be good to listen to, and I think we all accept that anything worth listening to is usually something that's been practised rather than winged - so I don't necessarily think one needs to be able to perform impromtu recitals at parties to be able to play! Obviously, once you've got to grips with the technicalities of the instrument, this will be easier to do on some instruments than others, anyway. What I think is needed is to be able to play like a musician rather than a technician - otherwise we might as well listen to things like the computerised version of Fur Elise that we get when we're put on hold on the phone!

I do wonder why someone would ask this question. Can you imagine:

Person 1: My friend X says he can play the {rinky-dink}

Person 2: Oh yeh, he can't play for ***.

Person 1: Let's ask on the forum then, and that'll show him up!


Hence my answer: if *you* think you can play it, you can play it. Everything else is gossip and snobbery. We were all learners once, and the best thing for a learner is to make them think they're doing really well, even if they're not. Who am I to spoil someone else' party?

We ARE all learners, no matter what level of accomplishment we are at. It's something I try to get over to my pupils - we are all on the same voyage of learning ... it's just that I've been travelling longer than they have and have had some good navigators.

I think it depends on the context and the way it's expressed - and it's all relative. To their peers children are probably seen as 'playing' a certain instrument, but to adults they're still 'learning' it. (Obviously I'm excluding really advanced pupils and prodigies from this general observation.)

This reminds me of when I acquired a new pupil who, at sixteen, announced, "I don't play Mozart." to which I replied "You mean you haven't played any Mozart yet!"

I do play the piano, in the sense that I sit at it for hours making desperate-sounding noises whilst bashing my ill-co-ordinated stiff fingers against it repeatedly in the hope like the monkeys with typewriters, I will, hopefully within my lifetime, achieve a basic piano form of Shakespeare.

Occasionally I play a bar correctly. This is an absolute joy.

So I play but I wouldn't say that I could play piano. If you see what I mean. If I went around saying things like that, people would say:

"Go on then, play us something!"

and if I didn't have Volume -1 of "Piano for Absolute Losers" on me, then I wouldn't be able to play anything at all. And if I did have it with me, and I had to play some little song a about a ship that six-year-olds roll off with ease and I sweat and fret over, it would be embarrassing. And it would just sound so hesitant and terrible.

There is a point where I will be happy with my level of piano achievement and perhaps say I "play." It is a long way off.

I think this is a really healthy way of looking at things.

I used to think when I got to such and such a standard I would think I could really "play" my instrument. Of course what happened was that I got to that standard and then changed the goal posts. I am not sure anyone is ever at the point where they think they can't improve - the difficult bit is acknowledging you would like to get better without being too hard on yourself.

I'm a bit divided on this one, I'm working on grade 8 and I can play the piano and my friend has never taken a grade but can still play popular stuff and we can easily duet on something by ear, so I'd say we can both play even though I'm better than him

I don't agree with all this stuff about 'you have to be grade 8 distinction' before you can say you can play something, because I've been playing since I was a small child and have always said that I can play piano, yes I wasn't good when I was younger, I only started to think of myself as 'good' when I passed Grade 7 and started on Grade 8, although my friends insist that I'm wonderful and practise for five hours a day (trust me I don't!)

I'm about grade 7 on my oboe, but when people ask, I don't say I play it. That implies that I'm serious about it and practice every day.

I don't think I would consider myself a "player" until I was totally at one with my instrument - could read a score as easily as I can read English and could play my clarinet as easily as I can write English.

To use a similar analogy, I don't think I would consider myself a "musician" until I knew as much about the music world as I do about my native country.

But I reserve the right to get impatient and to start calling myself a "player" when (yes, when, not if!) I get to Grade 8

for my standard, at least merit at grade 8 ABRSM

So what about singing then? Is there a difference between saying you sing, and saying you're a singer? Before my grade seven my teacher was explaining a technical thing about a piece and she said "you need to know these things because you're a singer now, not just someone trying to sing". Personally I wouldn't say I was a singer until I was much happier with the standard of my voice, but I might say I sing... because I do sing, people who've never taken lessons in their life sing... shouldn't it be the same with people saying they "play"? I think there's a difference between saying "I play" and "I'm a pianist", much as there's a difference between saying "I sing" and being a singer...

I might've contributed to this thread at some point, I don't recall... So sorry if I'm repeating myself...

I think you have a point, but I think it is relative to the audience/critics as well. To most people I am a pianist, but to the Kissin's and Argerich's of the world I am someone that (tries to) play piano.

In amateur orchestral circles, someone is an acceptable instrumentalist who can sit in an orchestral performance or rehearsal, make a positive contribution to the sound and not get lost. They become really useful when they can hold a part in chamber music without a conductor.

Not read all the comments as this string has got rather long but my 2 pennorth for what it's worth is this. I say I play clarinet and saxophone because I can do it well but at differing levels. However, I'd feel happy with either sitting in a band and sight reading/ playing pieces of a reasonable standard. I can also sight transpose on clarinet if the piece isn't too complicated and I do this for church frequently. I also 'play' piano but am not as competent or confident in my abilities. I can play pieces at grade 5 level that I've played before fairly easily now and can even play some grade 7 pieces but if i was given a hymn tune I couldn't sight read it - at least not with all the harmonies. I can however sight read with both hands some simple arrangements of show music, xmas carols etc. I can 'play' some tunes from a beginner flute book and even some solos from the guest spot books but without a very good tone in the latter. The former are quite musical. SO... I would say either I am a beginner flute player or that i am attempting to learn the flute (but am not devoting a lot of time to it at the moment)

I think there is a distinction between playing and performing. When I had a conversation with my piano teacher about not feeling I was really at grade 5/6/7 level she said to me "What you mean is you can't perform at that level but you can play at this level." She then followed up with neither can I without practice. I felt this is a good point. Yet she CAN play better than I can, She can sight read through pieces at this level. I can't.

Don't think we're gonna get a definitive answer here but certainly an interesting debate.

Been thinking a bit more about this question and wondering is saying you play just because you can get a note or two a bit like a child saying they can read because they recognise 1 or 2 words or that they can count because the can reel off the correct sequence 1 - 10?

With reading to truly read they need to be able to decode or recognise at sight a large number of commonly used words and understand meaning.

With counting they need to understand that you count each object in turn and none more than once and know the correct order of numbers.

Using these analagies a child can read when they can work out what an as before unseen sentence says and means.
A child can count when they can point to each of a group of objects in turn, using th ecorrect number sequence and come up with how many there are at the end of it.

However, this is not the same as being able to read a novel or technical paper or work out the number of objects numbering millions, billions, trillions etc.

Therefore, to be able to say you play an instrument I think you have to only have mastered the basics however there is then no limit to how far you can go with it.

Impressed with my own reasoning here!!! Never really thought about this before.

To me, to be able to call yourself a pianist/singer/flautist etc you have to have a reasonable repetoire and be able to perform pieces of a reasonable standard. Whereas, to be able to 'play', you have to have a knowledge of the instrument, and sufficient skills to be able to learn a piece and play it in a relatively musical way - you can be a rubbish performer, and have barely any repertoire, but still be able to play.

Going by this, I would say I can play the piano, but am not a pianist.

Personally, I think you can say that you 'play' and instrument when you would be happy to 'play' to someone else.

Me too

Yeah this is what I think too. I think you can play it once you can play basic things, like short songs, but generally if someone was asking if you could play an instrument actually good enough for it to be entertainment or something then I would say grade 1.

i think a few of those could count but also being able to play with others not as in 2 people or a little group but as in a band of somesort so being able to stay in time and watever else you do.
i do think if you can blow the instrument you can play it but wether you can play play it is different if you get my drift.

Is it just me, or does anyone else find that the goalposts move as you get (in my case slightly) more proficient?
At one point I would have said "able to play a piece with dynamics and phrasing", then when I could do that, it shifted to "grade 1 standard" and now that I've done grade 1 it's moved to "grade 5 standard". I suspect that if/when I achieve grade 5, I still will not be convinced that I can actually play the flute!

Yup. Ellie Elephant has got it.

"Playing an instrument" always seems to be the standard a couple of levels above the one you happen to be at.

I suppose that as you improve, the more you discover can be done, so the more you need/want to learn. For example, when just starting the cello, I used to judge a 'good' cellist as someone who could do vibrato. When I learnt how to do vibrato, I next wanted it to be fluent, and confident, and now I want to improve my technique and learn to do 'wide' versus 'narrow' vibrato, etc etc....

If someone ever asks me if I play an instrument I always reply that I'm trying to play the piano, big difference!! I've got the feeling I'll be saying that for the rest of my life...unless a miracle happens!!!

Often posts are written about people learning nothing but exam pieces, and so does that mean they can "play the instrument" or simply that they are able to "play some pieces".

I agree totally with this-for me, it's always seemed to be that the more I learn, the more I realise I still have left to learn!! I suppose for all intents and purposes, I would say I play the piano if I was asked, but I still don't consider myself a pianist, if that makes sense. I'm floating in a grey area between grade 2 and 3 for violin, but I still wouldn't say I play violin by any stretch of the imagination.

I note that this topic has been going on for nearly 5 years so I am somewhat late in making a contribution !
However, it seems clear to me that any claim to 'play an instrument' presupposes two things:

(i) a degree of competence in playing technique and musicianship which enables the player to express a piece in an intelligent musical manner. The level of advancement (i.e. ABRSM Grade or other)need not be high for there is plenty of worthwhile music (certainly for the piano) of an elementary standard of difficulty.

(ii) regular playing of the instrument. I do not see that you can claim to 'play' an instrument even if you've achieved Grade 8 standard at some time in the past and have not touched the instrument for years. Only if it is a habit can you truthfully say you play the instrument.

as long as you can play grade 1 pieces you can play an instrument

To put it as tersely as possible: two levels above whatever level you have achieved

I think if you can produce a sound on the chosen instrument, you can play it. It just depends whether or not you can play it well .

I chose other. My feeling is that if an instrumentalist can pick up any piece of music and start playing it with very few errors, the right tempo and dynamics then they are able to play that instrument.

Well there aren't many people that can play an instrument on these forums, then!

I'm sure somebody has already said this in the past....

My definition is if you can play a piece well enough for others to enjoy. It doesn't have to be a particularly difficult piece either IMO.

It goes without saying that a simple piece played well is miles better than a highly technical piece played poorly.

Correction: By those standards, there aren't any people that can play an instrument on these forums (or anywhere else!)

Being able to play simple pieces without dynamics etc. Is an option, I would rewrite this and include with dynamics.

Yes - if you make a sound that others like to listen to you are playing an instrument.

If you understand what you are playing/singing and communicate well with your audience, you can play your instrument.

In our performance sessions at Uni lots of people come with pieces they are rehearsing to perform in front of other students. A lot of the time they are not perfect performances (note/time slips). However, nearly all the time there is musical shape and understanding which engages us as the listeners.

Bang go all the recorder players and harpsichordists if you insist on more than giving an illusion of dynamics in that....

Don't know about the harpsichord, but any half decent recorder player on a half decent modern instrument can actually do a lot with real dymanics - we don't have to pretend!

I think this is a very subjective matter, with many different factors to be taken into account. You could have say, a Pianist at Grade 3 standard, who feels the music, articulates it well etc. You could then have a Pianist playing something very difficult, but is simply banging away on the keys, with no attention to detail. So who's the better musician? The first one. As my teacher says, anybody can play the right notes, but only a musician can play the music. But then the argument is, any instrumentalist needs technique as the basis of their playing - that is true, but IMO an amateur who feels the music and plays it well, is much better than somebody who can play a Chopin Etude but simply hits the right notes. That's my take on it. A musician to me is somebody who understands music, and the concept of a piece.

I don't think its a standard thing more of an attitude. Playing and practising daily as part of a normal working day, as regular as say brushing hair and teeth. Unless it is exceptionally poor practice the person will improve which in my opinion gives a person the ability to say they play an instrument. You could be grade 8 or diploma standard and hardly play the instrument, then by definition you aren't playing the instrument.