Rowan Weaver

I've always gone with the idea that if any sounds are pointed at and called music, they are music. 4'33'' is kind of exactly that. It's pointing at the sounds around it and saying "that is music" and I don't see why I would disagree.


No, to be played there would still have to be the "instruments", and while normally I would say that that would be the audience, as that is what is listened for, it is at least stated to be a "piano piece", meaning piano and pianist. If it were performed in an anechoic chamber, sure the echos wouldn't be there making it near inaudible, but the original sounds made simply by the pianist breathing, shifting weights, etc would still be there.
And if you played any music in space through an mp3 player and speakers, there would be no sound. And I'm pretty sure the speakers' diaphragms wouldn't work right anyway... but that's not the point.

Your argument seems to be that the music is dictated by the instructions given, which can exist without the need for sound, but oftentimes music isn't appreciated for technical merit, rather temperament or texture, which could not exist as concepts without sound. Yes music can exist without any apparent thought towards the actual sound and still be exceptional (Conlon Nancarrow), but the opposite can be true as well (Merzbow I think. I don't listen much. Not since I missed a fire alarm because I thought it was part of the song...).
And to say that, simply because 4'33'' is reliant totally on sound to profess its philosophy, rather than expressing itself through current post-Pythagorean equivalencies, dismisses a lot of what sets music apart from other media.

I'd never heard of the anechoic chamber though. That thing's cool.



I dunno, what's sexier than the sounds of sex? *Plays loud amateur porn videos converted to FLAC in bed*