What is music, what is not?

DeadChannel · 12-26-2014, 02:19 AM

Sure, but it's not as if the people at Webster's actually had this debate. You're trying to throw the dogma of some unrelated group at me. Point is, you're dodging the question.

Zhanteimi · 12-26-2014, 02:20 AM

Not at all. I'm not putting music in a box. I'm respecting music by treating music as music and non-music as non-music. This is analogous to putting clothes on a kitten. By doing so, the owner is treating the kitten like a child instead of an animal, thus disrespecting the kitten-ness of the kitten. That owner may think he loves and understands kittens more than others, but actually he loves and understands his kitten less than someone who treats his kitten with the respect and love due an animal.

Machine · 12-26-2014, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeadChannel

Sure, but it's not as if the people at Webster's actually had this debate. You're trying to throw the dogma of some unrelated group at me. Point is, you're dodging the question.

It's all he's done since he started coming into this debate, I don't think we've gotten an answer beyond is not music because I say it isn't.

DeadChannel · 12-26-2014, 02:22 AM

Nevertheless, define "musical"
And yeah, we're going in circles, but you're leading.

**Frownland** · 12-26-2014, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mordwyr

Not at all. I'm not putting music in a box. I'm respecting music by treating music as music and non-music as non-music. This is analogous to putting clothes on a kitten. By doing so, the owner is treating the kitten like a child instead of an animal, thus disrespecting the kitten-ness of the kitten. That owner may think he loves and understands kittens more than others, but actually he loves and understands his kitten less than someone who treats his kitten with the respect and love due an animal.

I'm of the opinion that art has boundaries that are less defining than food or life forms. If I tried to feed you arsenic and told you it was food you would say "**** you cocksucker, that isn't food you're trying to kill me!" And you'd be right. But then I try to show you a field recording and you would say "**** you cocksucker, that isn't music you're trying to kill me!" And then we'd have a philosophical discussion after I called you a little bitch for thinking I was trying to kill you with music.

Zhanteimi · 12-26-2014, 02:23 AM

1. an art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color.
2.
the tones or sounds employed, occurring in single line (melody) or multiple lines (harmony), and sounded or to be sounded by one or more voices or instruments, or both.

Zhanteimi · 12-26-2014, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

I'm of the opinion that art has boundaries that are less defining than food or life forms. If I tried to feed you arsenic and told you it was food you would say "**** you cocksucker, that isn't food you're trying to kill me!" And you'd be right. But then I try to show you a field recording and you would say "**** you cocksucker, that isn't music you're trying to kill me!" And then we'd have a philosophical discussion after I called you a little bitch for thinking I was trying to kill you with music.

Are you calling me a bitch or cocksucker?

**Frownland** · 12-26-2014, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mordwyr

Are you calling me a bitch or cocksucker?

Look up hypothetical situation in Webster's

. I'm saying neither, man. And it was YOU who called me the cocksucker!

Machine · 12-26-2014, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mordwyr

1. an art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color.
2.
the tones or sounds employed, occurring in single line (melody) or multiple lines (harmony), and sounded or to be sounded by one or more voices or instruments, or both.

Again we've said this a definition cannot be the be all end all of what music can possibly subjectively be. To not run this around again can ask you why can't the rhythm of the rain and the melody of a sea wave not be considered music?

Zhanteimi · 12-26-2014, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

Look up hypothetical situation in Webster's

. I'm saying neither, man. And it was YOU who called me the cocksucker!

I never called you cocksucker.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Machine

Again we've said this a definition cannot be the be all end all of what music can possibly subjectively be...

Who's we? I never agreed to that.

12-26-2014, 02:19 AM	#441 (permalink)
DeadChannel Music Addict Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Canada Posts: 1,259	Sure, but it's not as if the people at Webster's actually had this debate. You're trying to throw the dogma of some unrelated group at me. Point is, you're dodging the question.

12-26-2014, 02:20 AM	#442 (permalink)
Zhanteimi Mord Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Tokyo Posts: 4,873	Not at all. I'm not putting music in a box. I'm respecting music by treating music as music and non-music as non-music. This is analogous to putting clothes on a kitten. By doing so, the owner is treating the kitten like a child instead of an animal, thus disrespecting the kitten-ness of the kitten. That owner may think he loves and understands kittens more than others, but actually he loves and understands his kitten less than someone who treats his kitten with the respect and love due an animal.

12-26-2014, 02:22 AM	#444 (permalink)
DeadChannel Music Addict Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Canada Posts: 1,259	Nevertheless, define "musical" And yeah, we're going in circles, but you're leading.

12-26-2014, 02:23 AM	#446 (permalink)
Zhanteimi Mord Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Tokyo Posts: 4,873	1. an art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color. 2. the tones or sounds employed, occurring in single line (melody) or multiple lines (harmony), and sounded or to be sounded by one or more voices or instruments, or both.