Guitar and some piano. little bit of vocals too. Was in a band a whiiiile ago. Actually recorded a few songs with a friend recently in the spare bedroom. Stuff that I wrote when I picked up the guitar again last year. When it's done i'll def put a link up to soundcloud or something.
As far as for being a "true" musician, I understand what the Roman dude is trying to say. But I think his idea is fixated on the possibility that a musician might have to collaborate with another stranger musician. When I used to play, I was totally fulfilled & content playing and writing songs alone. A lot of times with my band mates too. But we talked about the music, told each other what key this or that was in, wrote chords down on these chord box sheets my friend would print and also played by ear. Mostly though, verbal communication was key. And to be honest, that totally worked for us.
Fact is, A LOT of legitimate mainstream acts today work that way. And A LOT of those acts create great albums and have solid musical chemistry that way. Furthermore, being able to read, write and having the privilege of a music background is of NO CONSEQUENCE in determining the caliber of artist that you are or can become. And it doesn't even remotely suggest whether or not you're excellent live performer.
Anyways, what about super experimental music? All these artist who use weird electronic mediums to generate sounds unconventionally? Musicians who overlap the sounds of say, a crowded train and barking dogs with ocean waves and tribal chants? Do you really think these type of musicians will be exchanging sheets of music with each other? Of course not. And because they don't, because it just isn't beneficial or necessary or even relevant for them, they're not musicians in your eyes? If so, now you've crossed over the line where you're determining what's music and what isn't. And that's not cool amigo.