Don writes:

>My preference is to leave definitions of classical music to the academic
>community; in all other venues, a definition offers little and just
>tends to elicit a bunch of different opinions.

Problem is they can't define it either, besides, discussions are fun.
Consider this exchange -

"What do you do? I am a composer.  Oh really, what kind of music do you
write.  Classical music.  Really, I don't know much about that, what is
classical music anyway.  I don't know.  You don't? No, in fact nobody
knows.  Then how do you know that what you write IS classical music? Well
that depends on what the meaning of the word is is.  OK, well look it was
nice talking to you, I'm going to get a drink, enjoy the party."

BTW way, I actually asked:

>About that, lets me say, I have posted a question to the ams-l and
>will give it a try here.  The term "classical form" is the issue.  I
>asked "where did the term classical musical originate and does it have
>a specific meaning".

Maybe we can forget the "specific meaning" part and concentrate on where
this term was actually first used in print to make the distinction from
popular music.  That IS a legitimate question, after all.

Bill Pirkle