Are singers musicians?

Are lead vocalists who do not play an instrument considered musicians?
I realize the training it must take to be an accomplished opera singer and the not so much training to be a rock singer but are these performers technically musicians?
The human voice is a musical instrument. Professional singers, particularly operatic, generally require extensive ongoing training in the use of their voice as a musical instrument.
If the definition of musician is one who uses or plays a musical instrument then singers are by definition musicians.
Absolutely yes.
That depends on your definition of musician. Loosely, anyone who makes music, vocal, percussion, or instrumental, is a musician.

If you hold the term musician to a higher standard, then only someone who is musically literate and has developed both the specialized knowledge and skills of music can be called a musician. Certainly, there are literate, skilled, and knowledgeable vocal musicians (Annie Lennox for example), but the average pop singer is not. And by this definition, the musicianship of many pop/rock instrumentalists could also be denied.
All singers and instrumentalists are musicians. Despite the fact that they are using their voice the singer must create and convey a musical idea. This idea might be a relatively simple pop song or a more complex one, like those typically found in jazz and opera. Interestingly, I can recall a conversation between Ella Fitzgerald and Andre Previn. Previn is one of the few musicians who can play jazz and classical music. At one point in their conversation Fitzgerald, being modest, stated that she wasn’t really a musician. Previn wisely disagreed with Fitzgerald’s assessment. I’m with Previn.
So then, technically speaking Johnny Rotten is a musician?
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000, states that a musician is:

...One who composes, conducts, or performs music, especially instrumental music.

Therefore, in addition to instrumentalists and singers, both composers and conductors are also musicians.

Makes sense I guess!
The human voice conveys pitch like any other instrument. Singers must understand and apply music theory like any other instrumentalist. The great ones do this to a high level.

It's true that some singers don't have the second part of the above. But this is also true of many guitarists and other instrumentalists.

So I say yes, singers are musicians.
OMG, I just realised that given our definition, that, and I can't believe I am saying this, but Yoko Ono qualifies as a, (excuse me while I throw-up!).... musician.

Man, does that leave a bad taste in my mouth!
What on Earth is the point of asking such a question, and what on Earth makes you suppose there is a "technical" sense of "musician" that determines the answer, or that anyone should care about?
There are musicians, and some are professional, others amateur. Some musicians are great musicians, others are merely good, and then there are bad, very bad, and awful . . .

Maybe there's a spot in there for Yoko, and Johnny Rotten
I remember when the local authority (city hall) received a noise pollution complaint about Ms Ono's piano playing, I thought to myself at the time that I would not complain about her piano playing, but only when she started to sing,lol.

Johnny Rotten's voice is ok, I mean when he sang in his group P.I.L he fitted the songs well, and they were really good songs to!
Perhaps there is a spot for Bob Dylan, like after ...awful....

I am sure when a 'singer' needs to right on a form 'occupation', that do indeed (and quite correctly) put musician as their occupation as opposed to something like
throat warbler..............
Here's how I see it:

A singer that cannot play a musical instrument is a singer and not a musician. A person that can both play an instrument and sing is both a singer and a musician and if they can write music, they are a composer as well. The human voice is instrumental in singing, but it is not an instrument.
So then, technically speaking Johnny Rotten is a musician?


Imagine trying to substitute Sting, Bob Marley, Jerry Garcia, Jim Morrison...or many others on a version of "God Save The Queen"

It just wouldn't be the same.
gotta go with the dictionary dogs can sing, but they can't play guitars or keyboards. those lessons were a waste of money.
We might get around the dilemma by admitting Yoko and Rotten do NOT make music, therefore, they are NOT musicians.

Vocal chords are instruments. Playing the vocal chords well takes as much skill, talent, and years of practice as any manmade instrument.

We have the same semantic problem with the words, artist, painter, photographer. Does that mean anyone who has drawn a stick figure, finger painted in kindergarten, or pushed a shutter release is an artist, or painter, or photographer?
Suggested definition: Musician = someone who makes music.
That'll help if you define "music". Good bloody luck.

How about: Music: what musicians make qua musician. Helpful. huh?

If you hate it and can't imagine why anyone would like it, is it still music? Well then who make you lord and king of taste?

If it's not an evaluative term, so that its being good or enjoyable is irrelevant, then it seems it will be a less interesting and important question. But then we'll still have to distinguish good from bad music.

How about, Music = organized sound produced at least in part for no other reason than to be listened to? Then every table top spoon drummer and idle whistler is a musician. Fine by me, but some of you are outraged.

I don't care nearly so much about word definitions as about the truth of evaluative judgments, but it seem like some of you do.

Like I said, good luck with all this. If I only understood the point.

If it sounds good, it is good. (Ellington, I presume).