I have been trying to find a clear, concise, and complete way to define the term Music. Since a person can interpret music as being any form of sound and/or silence, how do you distinguish the difference between noise and music?

This is my in development definition currently:
Music is the interpretation of the organized combination of sound/silence (which can be audiated in the mind)

Interpretation defines that music cannot exist without someone around to hear it.

Organized defines that the sounds/silences of music can be analyzed by the person doing the interpreting or listening.

Combination of sound/silence defines the obvious: music exists as sound/silence.

Audiation defines that actual sound waves must not be produced for music to exist. If a person can recall or create in his/her mind the illusion of sound/silence, than they can hear music without sound being produced.


Problems:
Can music be interpreted by non-human and/or non-living objects?
Is a cd player interpreting music or just data?
If it is interpreting data, than is audiation music?
Is sheet music, music?
If nothing is around to interpret the sound waves representing music, is there music?


I would like to hear your idea of the definition of music and any answers or questions about the above. Thanks.

Can music be interpreted by non-human and/or non-living objects? depends on your definition of interpret, if it is to analyze and make data then yes, if it is to take it and make ideas and emotions out of it then no at least not yet

Is a cd player interpreting music or just data? a CD player is taking data and making sound out of it it's just reading data not interpreting music that comes off of sheet music

If it is interpreting data, than is audiation music? NR

Is sheet music, music? no... it's just that sheet music, instructions for making the music

If nothing is around to interpret the sound waves representing music, is there music? Yes because the music is still in existance wether or not someone is there or not.

In the non-human category, studies have shown that a plant that has pure harmonies or is more pleasant to humans such as romantic music playing around it, grows better than a plant which has dark and heavy or distorted music playing next to it. Cats can interpret music in that there is a video of a cat that moves its mouth with the lyrics of "old time rock-n-roll." The cat understands what happens next in the music.

A cd-player reads the data and provides a playback correct.
When we read notation, we read the data and provide playback. Sure non-beginners apply musicality to it. But then are beginners not creating music, because they just provide a playback for data on a page. and at a poorer quality than a cd-player.

So then, music has a much more concrete definition. What might you suggest the definition be. If music still exists whether or not it is heard, than there is a distinction between noise and music.

If music is being played or produced someone has to be their to hear it.

But you might come back and tell me that their could be a CD player making the music, but we already said that it can't make music, but rather interpret data and make sound.

I think it takes a sentient-being to make music, otherwise it would be noise.

do we not just interpret data and make sound.
The majority of music played is from some sort of sheet music. Whether it be actual sheet music with standard notation or tab, or by ear. When playing by ear you just do not take the time to write it down. So we are just the cd-player. The cd is like the sheet music. And the cd-player is the performer. It analyzes the data presented and provides playback. That is what we do.

Like what about the case of the musical piano.
The method used is to pluck strips of metal. Each strip is tuned by length and is plucked by a braile-like dot on a wheel.
This is the kalimba at work. A person plucks strips of metal to play a song.
Also the musical piano normally sounds better.

If the musical piano is making music, than isnt the cd-player, just it means to produce sound is different.

Music: a preformance of sounds and notes that fit together to please that of whom it was preformed for...

By that you believe music has to be enjoyed. Music cannot be disturbing or boring. you also mean that music is intentionally made sounds. you are saying that music cannot be found in nature. And music must be performed for somebody. Somebody being the keyword. Music cannot be performed for the sake of music. and Not for a particular somebody.

To the part of the discussion regarding making music and the argument of player pianos, beginner and established musicians, and cd players....

The discussion right now is covering whether or not any of the previously mentioned "devices" actually "makes" music. I think it is safe to say that they all "produce" music, but I think that point has been established.

I think right now it all goes back to the "definition" being used for what can "make music" in regards to interpretation which so far, is really only effectively done by a human being rather than a machine.

But...talking about "making music" what about the composer writing down ideas on a piece of staff paper? No sound is coming out other the scratching of a pencil on the paper. However I think it safe to say this is a situation where music is truely being "made". Now, this person can then go to a piano or other instrument and play what he wrote (or what's in his head if not written down like was mentioned in a previous post) or even hum or sing it out loud or to themself, but this...going by previous discussion...can just be considered as "producing" the music and is an analysis of a code. If you take it that far, you go into the area where the line between music and math starts to blur. Music can be as abstract as other (more complex) mathematical theories, I mean you can break things down and do very complex things that aren't standard practice when it comes to composing but that's generally not done. Why? Because it's supposed to be accessible. You can talk about music as a theory/mathematical tool (abstract theories), as a language (interpretation, what you can see), or as sound (what is heard). I guess it all depends on which area you are coming from.

**Edit**

Quote:

---

By that you believe music has to be enjoyed. Music cannot be disturbing or boring. you also mean that music is intentionally made sounds. you are saying that music cannot be found in nature. And music must be performed for somebody. Somebody being the keyword. Music cannot be performed for the sake of music. and Not for a particular somebody.

---

After reading this I have come up with the simplest answer I can come up with. Music is what the listener percieves. It's like blasting a CD that you think is great music, and someone yells at you to "turn off that noise". It is not music to the other person. A dripping faucet can be music to one person and noise to another. It all depends on those who hear it. Certain things are just assumed to be music and others not. The tricky thing here is "the pleasure principle" of music. Enjoyable things can be considered "music to your ears". In that phrase music is taken to be something enjoyable. As to whether music can be disturbing or boring yes it can be. But it is up to the person hearing it to decide that. Lots of "popular" music has what many would consider a "disturbing" sound to it (i.e. prog rock, death metal, that type of thing etc...) but it is still "consumed" by many people who enjoy it, even though there are other people who dislike it and do not consider it music. What about in the score of a movie? Disturbing sounds can be used to convey a mood and although it may not be pleasurable to hear, if it provides the desired effect it has done its job. Is it music? Most would consider it that since it is a scored piece of literature. But this is getting abstract again. If you go more into that it has to do with it has a purpose or serves a need and thats really somewhat offbase so i will leave it at music itself if percieved by the listener. This is not to say though that music cannot happen when no one can hear it, that goes into the idea of how would you know. It would be a rumor, if no one could hear it, it could not be proven....beyond that, how would you know about it?

i think i stopped making sense a long time ago here, and i have no idea what point i was getting at anymore so i will leave it there

My last point I want to make on "devices" making music is the CD player has no choice in what is played. Thus it can't really play music. The audio device "making" music is just a technological technicality, because the music has already been created.

indoorperc made me think of this. It DOES all depend on where you are coming from...or even how you were raised. My father, for example, swears up and down the rap is not music. He claims it is noise.

I like quads4ever's definition. Jake....I do believe music has to be enjoyed....if it isn't enjoyed it is just noise to that person....like my dad who thinks rap is noise cause it annoys him.

well, the main question i would like to come closer to answering is what is the definition of music?
We branched off when discussing whether or not audiation (hearing music in your head) is music. Because most definitions state that music uses sound. When audiating no sound is produced, only an illusion of sound in the mind.
I believe that the information inside a composer's mind is music. NO doubt about it.

We branched off due to the statement of music is the interpretation of....
It was said that a cd player merely interprets data and produces playback. I know have switched to believing that a cd player is making music.
Because if i put on a cd and you do not know if that is performed by a cd or a live ensemble, if asked what is heard is music then the answer would be yes in both situations.
If you could please give me examples of what you believe the definition of music is. Or if you have any questions or disproving examples of my definition please reply.

mine is:
Music is the interpretation of the organized combination of sound/silence.