The sounds are still music, they're just at their most abstract and deconstructed. If those sounds were taken and arranged into a 4 on the floor rhythm, I doubt that you'd have the same kind of apprehension. These days I don't think that anyone can get away with picking out a specific sound and saying "this can never be music."

Get ready for a flurry of ****posts at about 4:01 AM tomorrow.

The 80's version of what Frown just said:

I might have picked the wrong day to get drunk at home.

Well yeah, but if someone doesn't think something is music then it still isn't music to them. With a concept like music (or art itself) where its very existence is subjective (i.e. made up) you can't just say that something is objectively music. It's just music to those who hear it as music since that's all that music is. I can say that perhaps you're just being pretentious but it would be pretentious to think that my concept of music is inherently more valid than yours simply because it's my concept.

Let's keep this going so he'll definitely see it.

Quality of music is subjective, concept of music is not. That would be like arguing that Dee wasn't played on guitar (that's me keeping it going).

Why isn't the concept of music subjective? Music isn't a rock or gravity or man-made global warming or anything that can be proven to exist. It's simply an emergent concept of the brain that may very well simply be a defect of our consciousness' interpretation of patterns, much like religion (ahem... allegedly).

Bruh, that's in like half a day for us so you'll either be alright or too hungover to bother.

It's an abstract concept that still remains rooted in objective terms. Can you prove language to exist? How?

I hate timezones.