How can you define music? | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in
Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 235 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614151
Today 3
Topics 127544
  
 
Messageboard index
How can you define music?
 

offline thecurbcreeper from United States on 2003-07-23 14:36 [#00791200]
Points: 6045 Status: Lurker



Art is just a way of putting something above other things.
Trying to make it stand out. It's elitist.

Music, on the other hand, doesn't have an air of ranking to
it. It's arranged sounds. Whatever you like it to be.


 

offline nanotech from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2003-07-23 14:47 [#00791212]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular



i'm surprised no'ones posted webster's definition:

websters.com:The art of arranging sounds in time so as to
produce a continuous, unified, and evocative composition, as
through melody, harmony, rhythm, and timbre.

that's possibly "music," but what about rythmic pulses that
the def can groove too?


 

offline promo from United Kingdom on 2003-07-23 14:47 [#00791214]
Points: 4227 Status: Addict



Something you hear and like (i.e. music to my ears), the
rest is just noise. Lol.


 

offline nacmat on 2003-07-23 16:17 [#00791278]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to nacmat: #00791146



nobody liked my definition?

not mine really

 

offline marlowe from Antarctica on 2003-07-24 06:23 [#00791814]
Points: 24590 Status: Lurker



I apologise Funkmaster - I was just kidding with you. I love
you really.

Music doesn't have to be sonic, even if some Dictionary says
it does. Dictionaries are crap when it comes to abstract
terms - they're only good for looking up what an Aardvark is
(and even then, NO picture ! unless it's one of those kids'
dictionaries - why aren't adults allowed to have fucking
pictures???)

Music is Vibration

 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2003-07-24 17:20 [#00792702]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



This is probably the reason it is called music theory. My
definition might be

Audio, be it tonal or atonal in nature, arranged into a
composition with the intention of being listened to; Often
being composed of melody, harmony, and rhythm, although not
limited to these properties.

Whether or not one chooses to qualify sounds occuring in
nature or as a by product of technology created by man in
order to fulfill other purposes (ie a copy machine or
typewriter) as music is up to the individual. This may be
influenced by ones view on God (did God design these sounds
to have musical qualities .. if God designed the music
system, is it then surprising that similar music systems can
be percieved occuring on their own in nature). One might
also say that the appearance of composition is occuring
based on associations to elements found in man made music,
which may have originated to mimic those same patterns early
man would have heard in nature. Interesting cycle that
would be.


 

offline dariusgriffin from cool on 2003-07-24 17:24 [#00792706]
Points: 12428 Status: Regular | Followup to marlowe: #00791814



I think vibrations, even if you can't hear them, can still
be considered as sound. You seem to confuse 'sonic' and
'audible'.


 

offline dariusgriffin from cool on 2003-07-24 17:28 [#00792715]
Points: 12428 Status: Regular | Followup to dariusgriffin: #00792706



Oh, and I might be completely wrong there.

 

Messageboard index