I've let it go...sorta.
It's curious to me that two people can hear the same sounds and come to completely different opinions about it.
Would I be outta line in saying that music is unique as a form of expression...it doesn't really convey information (I know it can be used to convey information, but doesn't that make it language?). You can write a peice of music and title it Confederate Veterans Day, but really who could hear it without the title and know what it was about? You could make the sound of a ducks quack with a kazoo, but it's the sound of a duck...and I don't think I'm being tautalogical about this.
There are sequences of sound that we recognize as being complete and sperate from other sounds, and these are different than a ducks quack or language. You could string a series of duck quacks into a song, but it's the arrangment that would set it off as a song and not the sound of ducks quacking. One might mistake a language for music, but that would depend on the listener being ignorant of it's actual purpose.
I feel like I may be getting beyond my depth here...in fact I know I am and I better move along before somebody stops by and pops my floaties.
I know there's this business of lyrics...they can be carried on music but they aren't the music...and they can be ignored. At least I know it's possible or I would never have paid for three different copies of Double Nickles on a Dime. Maybe they can't, but that's a different issue. You might say a lyric is depressing, but how can a piece of music be depressing.
Anyway...it's different it's not something you have to interpret...you just hear it and it shakes your rump, taps your foot, or whatever, or not.
How can two people with functioning ears have different reactions to the same ineffable sequence of sounds.? What else besides hearing is going on?
