> All of these things are sort of fiddling at the edge of the question of a musical instrument, which is: should you confound their constraints or work within them?

I feel like this is no different than asking “what style of music should I play?”

The answer is whatever you are drawn to as an artist. What interests you more?

I hope some people work within the constraints of an instrument, and some people change the instrument. I love that there are people who make music with household items, and I love people who faithfully play instruments unchanged in design for thousands of years.

All of the options provide plenty of outlets for creativity, and I love that there are people who want to explore different ones, and share the results with the rest of us. Sometimes one of those modifications invents a new instrument that captures the heart of millions and will proliferate for decades, and sometimes someone finds a new way to play an old instrument that opens the eyes of everyone to the possibilities that were always there.

> Sometimes one of those modifications invents a new instrument that captures the heart of millions

Absolutely — the pedal steel is the obvious example. The entire notion of the upward country pedal steel guitar bend is actually a side-effect of the continuous behaviour of a pitch shifting mechanism that the original designer did not design it for, which has now evolved to create an entire genre.

Disagree. It's not a one-way trip, where the musician has inspiration, and the musical instrument is the vehicle. For most musicians, the musical instrument is itself a source of inspiration. That can be either expansive (look what this thing can do! wow!) or constraining (i guess i have only one option).

This is one reason why some musicians (guitarists cough) collect multiple instruments. A telecaster makes you play differently than a les paul.

[dead]