Where do we draw the line between music and noise?

[FalloutJack]

Hmm?

Can't really say if it's an autistic trait of yours or not. We're all about as different as people without it. Even still, my brain still picks up repeating pattern, underlying melody, and so on. While it is - I looked it up - an experimental run to try and redefine music as artform and such, it's not technically noise. It can be construed as a series of noises arranged just so, in a pattern, and we can still call it music. Why?


I listen to tracks from Chu Ishikawa's work, which went into the Tetsuo series of Japanese horror movies. It is a use of many industrial noises and sounds along with - I assume - synthesizers to create this particular style of music. It's made up of noises, but it's patterned in such a manner that it is music.

 

[Artina89]

I believe that it depends on the listener. I have just listened to a bit of Stalaggh and I didn't enjoy it, but some people do and I respect that. It wouldn't do for us all to be the same.

 

[saoirse13]

Its personal perception.... however, anything screamo makes me kinda sick. I can't stand it and to be honest would not even regard it as music. The same can be said for most dubstep. But as i said it is down to each person to decide for themselves.

 

[SilentlyHilly]

I think it's safe to say that music is most intrinsically linked with rhythm. That being said, music does not necessarily require rhythm. Ambient noise can easily be considered music, for instance.

That aside, it's like the rectangle and the square. Anything with rhythm is music, but not all music has to have rhythm. But this idea is really just to cover all bases, considering that probably close to 99% of what we consider music has rhythm as a base. For the purposes of practicality, I would argue that music is simply anything that has rhythm.