With V5, they tried going back to the original concept of Vocaloid: a serious program for professional musicians.
I'm curious as to why you think this. I'm not saying it's incorrect, I'm just curious. My impression of Vocaloid 5 was that, for the most part, it wasn't a huge upgrade from V4--it just includes a bunch of presets for making the voices sound different/use different breath or vibrato effects. I guess that point's debatable, since I don't have insight into what the program actually does--is it really just changing the baseline for the existing parameters (BRE, CLE, etc.) behind the scenes to create different effects, or is it some other kind of processing that exists in addition to those things? To my way of thinking, V5 and its presets made Vocaloid more approachable by novice users, which sounds like the opposite of a professional user to me. Though, I suppose you could argue against that point, too--if Yamaha is targeting "professional musicians," that doesn't necessarily equate to "professional Vocaloid users." Someone who makes music professionally but isn't completely dedicated to using Vocaloids in that music might be more interested in getting quick, easy results than spending time tweaking Vocaloid parameters until they sound just right, the way a bedroom Vocaloid producer might.
I guess I'd break down the traits of Vocaloid 5 respective to for whom it's intended like this, for a start:
Professional Musician | Hobbyist/Non-Professional Musician |
High price tag | Voice presets, pre-made lyric phrases |
High hardware requirements | Inclusion of audio processing plugins (pros would likely have those already) |
| Ability to host WAV/audio files in the editor (Good for covers, which I'd guess is mainly the domain of bedroom hobbyists. Also could be seen as an attempt to avoid requiring a DAW, which pros would almost certainly have anyway.) |
Personally, I feel it's hard to compare Japanese DTMers to hobbyist Western Vocaloid producers. They sell their music at conventions and have doujin circles. I think that if we talk about "professional musicians" compared to hobbyist ones, which type are we talking about?
Saying hobbyist in terms of Western seems like someone who just does it for fun and has no fame. But if you say it in terms of Japanese, those people can have quite the following even if it is their side gig and not their day job.
Here, if we think of professionals, I think the lowest tier of professional musician would be like... a Soundcloud rapper or something. I'm not sure what we would think of as a low ranking professional in Japan.
That's just my two cents.
When I think of professional vs. non-professional, I often think of what I read they (used to?) do in sports--you're a professional if someone has paid you to do something. I get the idea from the story of Jim Thorpe, an athlete who went to the Olympics, got a number of medals, and then had them all taken away because the Olympics (at the time) were just for non-professionals but he had done something like play a game of baseball and get paid some measly fee at some prior point.
Under that logic, if you host a song on Bandcamp and someone pays you $1, you're a professional :) .
Having said that, if I'm serious about it, I think there would have to be some dimension of how much time you spend at the activity, too. And maybe how much of your income you derive from it? So maybe if it's something for which you get paid, at which you spend/have spent a lot of time, and which accounts for a large part of your income, you're a professional?