Yes, exactly - people could, and people DO listen to random sounds as music. I live in the city and sometimes, the soundscape IS as satisfying as a record. Music is everywhere. Human produced music is only one sub-genre.
Music is rhythm (time) + timbre (quality of vibration), perceived by an observer who categorizes the sounds as music. That's it! Anything else might apply to a style or genre, but is not broad enough to cover all musical activities in the world - you have to make the claim that some forms of musical activity "are not actually music". Examples might include field recordings, tibetan ritual music, Merzbow or compositions by John Cage. Clearly, to a musicologist, all of these activities could be classified and studied as music, even if it doesn't fit with your personal definition. Also, in regards to emotion being important, consider that in some cultures (buddhist, for instance) emotions are viewed quite differently. The purpose of art and music in these cultures would be to still the mind rather than to provoke emotion. Indeed, I personally find that the music I enjoy best has just such an effect. ~David > without it, you could just listen to > random sounds around you and feel as satisfied as if you just listened to > a record. and since thats not the case, theyre not the same. > > tom > > >
