Donald Satz wrote:

>It probably isn't useful, but maybe no definition is useful.  What useful
>purpose is served by saying that music is organized sound? What function
>gets served?

As I said - communication.  I just get a bit annoyed when under the guise
of being philosophical (which I think you were to some extent but I do get
the point you were making), people systematically mystify every word in the
English language.  What is death? What is existence? - The perfect example
- Existentialism - a bunch of depressed English students getting each other
worked up about how alone they all are.  Load of crap.  We are expected to
think these people are clever for thinking these things.  They are not.

>Considering my wife fairly typical of most folks concerning music, I
>asked her if she considered natural sounds to be music.  Her answer was
>"Sometimes.  There are some sounds I like, some I don't." Not a very
>illuminating answer but another view from one individual.  And I keep
>saying that the individual determines what constitutes music.

But keeping things simple, just ask her whether she LIKES some natural
sounds, and she will say yes.  She may ever say that some are 'music to
her ears'.  Are they music? No. Therefore we maintain the definition
of music and when someone says music, we can be very sure that they mean
deliberately organised sounds.  As much as I would like to say that chart
music is noise, it isn't, since someone has deliberately organised some
sounds and it is therefore music.

>But a definition of music being useful? I don't think so, but I'm very
>willing to alter that opinion if I hear/read something that's better
>than what I'm thinking.

Definitions of everything should be useful.  Music is no exception.  When
I say useful I mean it is a clearly defined word and everyone knows what
it means.

On the other hand of course, I am probably being a boring fart and a little
variety of language from person to person is a fun thing.  Can you blame me
though - I am going in a couple of weeks to study maths at university.  You
don't get this problem in maths and that is why it is so much cleaner than
a language.  You start with a definition of say 'i = the square root of -1'
and work from there.

David Stewart
[log in to unmask]