What makes for a "good" musician?


Different musics require different skill sets, some technical, some not. In a lot of discussions about the talents of musicians, I hear talk mainly in terms of technical ability. I just watched today’s Leland Sklar YouTube video (he posts one everyday), in which he talks about playing "for the song". He recounts a story told him by the famous Hal Blaine, who in the 1970’s had a live gig in Santa Barbara. Hal says that during the set the young bassist was waaay over-playing, showing the world how good he was. After the set the bassist asked Hal what he thought. Hal’s response was: "I think we need a bass player."

There is an alternative view of musicianship, one based on how "musical" a musician is. What makes for musicality? Very simple: playing what the song asks for. Very subjective, right? When John Hiatt was given carte blanche in the choice of backing musicians for the recording of what became his Bring The Family album, he chose Ry Cooder, Nick Lowe, and Jim Keltner. Why were those his choices, rather than a guitarist, bassist, and drummer more renown for their technical "chops" (not that those three are exactly slackers ;-) ? Their musicality. John’s a songwriter, and he rates musicians by how well they play songs, not by how well they merely play their instrument. Those two are NOT synonymous.

But musicality is more than just that, as important as that is. It is one’s basic musical sensitivities, even in regard to the song itself. Example: The first version of "That’s How I Got To Memphis" (a great, great song) I heard was that of Buddy Miller. Listening to his version, you hear why Emmylou Harris has for years employed him as her guitarist, harmony singer, and bandleader. I’ve recently been listening to every available version of the song, including that of the song’s writer, Tom T. Hall. But it wasn’t until I heard a live version (from an old TV show) sung as a duet by Marty Stuart and Bobby Bare, that I realized: both Marty (and his great band The Fabulous Superlatives) and Buddy made a somewhat subtle change to the chord progression on the last line of the final verse ("forgive me if I start to cry", right before the last chorus), inserting a "passing" chord between Tom Hall’s "as written" first and second chords.

Inserting that passing chord required no technical playing expertise, but it did require advanced musical talent. It’s not hard to play, it just SOUNDS cool. That’s the musicianship I listen for.

128x128bdp24
Speaking of Miles:

“Anybody can play. The note is only 20 percent. The attitude of the motherfu&#r who plays it is 80 percent.”
― Miles Davis

“It’s not the notes you play, it’s the notes you don’t play”.
-- Miles Davis

“I always listen to what I can leave out.”
― Miles Davis

Re the basic question “What makes a good musician?”:

Some good comments so far and I agree with the OP’s basic premise (and Miles’ 😎). Of course, having great chops does not always mean possessing great musicality. Having said that, having great technical skill sometimes gets a bad rap. Great technical skill opens musical doors that remain shut to players with limited technical skill; even when they are fundamentally good musicians. The important point is that one doesn’t necessarily have to, nor is it always musically appropriate, to go through those doors. A player possessing limited technique can still be a good musician, but it can be.....limiting. While those flurries of notes and/or “complexity” that some players hope will add meaning to their playing are ultimately meaningless and even destructive, there are times when they are just the ticket and what serves the music best. If you don’t have the chops you can’t go there.

(Btw, pet peeve. and not meaning to take this in a different direction. “Musicality”. IT IS NOT AN AUDIO TERM! Musicians, not gear, possess musicality).
A blues festival I attended a few years back is the example that comes to mind about the difference between technical ability and pure magic.Several musicians performed their version of "Walking Blues" over the course of the weekend.Such a huge difference in the way a couple of the guys could bend a note and communicate emotion with subtle vocal inflections.
Musician to me is a technical term. A good musician is fluent with and able to read music, move between rhythms, and key signatures, identify themes and variations, and so on. On the drive home last night they were playing the children's song Twinkle Twinkle Little Star, and it sounded just as you remember, a kid pounding on one key at a time no feeling or subtlety or anything. Then a few notes are added. Flourishes and feeling. Minute later you are experiencing a piano concerto. Which it was. Mozart Variations in key of whatever. That's a musician. 

There's flavors of musicians, like session musicians, able to play different styles to suit the music, as determined by the writer and producer. There's a great example of this on The Eagle's Hell Freezes Over DVD where Don Henley is struggling to get the orchestra to sound right and says Its the blues, we have to give them the blues. There's players, able to read and play music off a sheet. There's performers, able to put on a show while playing. There's ones who combine all these skills and more. 

So the question what makes for a good musician depends almost entirely on what you think a musician is in the first place.
millercarbon
A good musician is fluent with and able to read music ...
Hmmm, that would omit John Lennon and the rest of the Beatles. Dylan. Stevie Wonder. Clapton.

It always struck me odd because reading music isn’t difficult. But I learned when I was young and I think that makes a difference.

Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge.
Exactly my point. What is a good musician? I'll let you know. But first, tell me what you mean by "musician". And "good".