The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Music lessons are too expensive and not available to everyone

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/18/2015 Category: Music
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 738 times Debate No: 76659
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




My name is roxanne russell and I am doing my gold arts award in which we have to form and communicate an issue within the arts world. My issue is that music lessons are too expensive and that music is not available to everyone to everyone.Please comment if you have an opinion.

Argument: The average music lesson cost "28 an hour, with you needing at least an hour a week needed. This means that there are less people taking music as there is a gap between those on benifits and those who can actually afford music lessons.Research by scientists has proved that music can boost your IQ by as much as 7 points. Any age can benifits from playing a musical instrument as it improves you fine motor skills.Music also helps you to release your feelings in an expressive controlled way.


Being a musician myself I have experience in the music industry. Music lessons are not necessary let alone not available. I play guitar and piano and I have thought myself to play both. if you have the instrument then you can learn how play. Many YouTube channels teach and instruct the basics along with pieces of music for free. You can also print out many instruction sheets and tutorials.
Debate Round No. 1
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by KayFoo 2 years ago
Which debate only has one round!?? What..
Posted by mfigurski80 2 years ago
Besides, the main cost of music is time and dedication, not actual money itself.
Posted by mfigurski80 2 years ago
And... where is your argument? You're simply assuming that 28 is too much, without any proof or sources at all. Hint, you can take this debate down before someone accepts it, change your argument, and repost it.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: *Note to Pro - try to avoid 1 round debates, it leaves you with no opportunity to respond to your opponent after they present their initial argument.* Conduct - Tie. Both had good conduct. S&G - Tie. Both had good spelling and grammar throughout. Arguments - Con. This was an interesting rebuttal from Con and reminiscent of a Kritik, in which Con undermined the fundamental issue Pro presented by showing the non-necessity of it in the first place. In doing so, I was convinced that Pro's issue was incorrect and that lessons aren't too expensive since you can get them for free from YouTube, as Con argued. Due to this, Con wins arguments. Sources - Tie. Neither utilized sources in this debate. *Note to Pro - when you make claims like, "scientists have proven..." you should follow it up with a link to the article where scientists actually prove it. It helps with the impact of your claims.*