[ARSCLIST] Music--was: CD versus Download was "All hail the analogue revolution..."

[Steven Barr <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Cox" <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> On 04/10/06, Steven Barr wrote:
> 
> > The question then becomes "At what point does a collection
> > of sounds become "music?!"...
> 
> When the person collecting and organising the sounds presents them as
> music.
> 
> (Bad music is still music.)
> 
Actually, I wasn't referring to "bad music" (I can even grant "Doggie
In the Window" status as "music!"). I was thinking of various essentially-
abstract pieces of "music" (or so called by their creators) that, to my
ears, had nothing whatsoever to raise them above the definition-level
of "noise!"

So...if the sounds are made using musical instruments, albeit
in ways not intended by their inventors, does that make the
result "music?"

Or can any collection of sounds, however made and using whatever
(if any) devices, be called "music" if the creator(s) thereof
choose to so identify it? And are we obligated to accept this
designation?

I can recall, decades ago, someone commenting thatm "To him,
the company name, 'Batten, Barton, Martin and Durstine' (or
whatever it actually was) sounded like someone throwing a
trunk down a flight of stairs" So...can I repeatedly recite
the name, possibly accompanying that with the throwing of
an actual trunk down an actual flight of stairs (this might
be quite expensive if union labour is necessary?)...and call
the results "music?" Or do I need to have a naked lady 
perform one or both tasks? And do I and/or the unclad damsel
and/or the trunk hurler (as well as any necessary assistants
thereof, inclusive) have to be paid AFM scale?

One wonders...

Steven C. Barr