Also, in this comment, Istanbul200 decided to cherry-pick a portion of my statement in order to support his argument. This is the full paragraph that statement was taken from. It's simple logic, which Istanbul200 has shown he doesn't understand.

Singers are literally the singest largest subset of musicians on planet earth.

That statement would have any relevance to this discussion if it said "Singers are literally the single largest subset of classical musicians on planet earth." From a logical standpoint, just because most musicians on earth are singers (which you have provided no proof for), that does not necessarily mean that most classical musicians are singers. For example, if 89 percent of musicians on earth were singers, that would mean 11 percent are non-singers. And if that were the case, and 10 percent of all musicians on earth were classical musicians, then that 10 percent could theoretically all be non-singers. Therefore, even if the claim you made is true (which it might not be because you provided no evidence whatsoever), based on your statement alone, it could theoretically be possible for no classical musicians to be singers. Obviously this is not the case, but based on your claim, from a logical standpoint, this would be possible.

Therefore, your claim without additional context has no relevance to the discussion. Your statement would be relevant to this discussion if it said "Singers are literally the single largest subset of classical musicians on planet earth". And, if that is your claim, provide evidence. Provide a source. Christ.