The most incredible piece of music i've ever heard. - General

[QUOTE=Hakita;40885179]There's a big difference between saying "I don't enjoy this" and saying "this isn't music".[/QUOTE] Not really, both are opinions.

[QUOTE=X-Neon;40886057]Not really, both are opinions.[/QUOTE] "This is not a book" - assertion "This book is bad" - opinion And since 4'33" is [I]technically[/I] a composition, then I'd say in the textbook music world, it is actually music. :v: It's one of the rare times when something like this could actually go into a textbook.

[QUOTE=AK'z;40886087]"This is not a book" - assertion "This book is bad" - opinion And since 4'33" is [I]technically[/I] a composition, then I'd say in the textbook music world, it is actually music. :v: It's one of the rare times when something like this could actually go into a textbook.[/QUOTE] It's an assertion of an opinion. When discussing matters like this, it shouldn't be necessary to preface everything with "in my opinion".

[QUOTE=X-Neon;40886174]When discussing matters like this.[/QUOTE] There really hasn't been much constructive discussion here tbh. Arguements about "whether it's music or not" helps nobody. It's also weird how someone can separate performing art and music (second page).

[QUOTE=X-Neon;40886174]It's an assertion of an opinion. When discussing matters like this, it shouldn't be necessary to preface everything with "in my opinion".[/QUOTE] saying it isnt music is an implication that it should not be enjoyed as music or as art by others and is therefore an assertion saying its bad is a statement of opinion and is acceptable

So, we can agree that music is an art medium. With 4'33", a message was being conveyed through that medium. It wasn't music in the sense that it sounds great and requires great talent, but Cage was just using music in a way that was totally unexpected at the time to make a point. It's not pretentious because it actually has a point to it and it's not like everyone's boasting about how they have 4'33" on their ipod or something and listen to it every day.

-snip- I think there's probably something I missed, so I should probably stop arguing. [editline]it's not okay[/editline] [QUOTE=AK'z;40891013]Why the fuck should it, it's not doing any physical/psychological harm to you whatsoever. If it was expressing some sort of [I]ideal[/I] then I'd get the hatred, but this shear hatred for what it really is, is so pointless. If something this simple is capable of making you angry and annoyed, tweaks must be made somewhere. :v:[/QUOTE] Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what people are saying exactly.

[QUOTE=Bernie Buddy;40890941][B]That's what annoys me.[/B] Everybody's calling this "Music" just because it TECHNICALLY fits.[/QUOTE] Why the fuck should it (excuse the language), it's not doing any physical/psychological harm to you whatsoever. If it was expressing some sort of [I]ideal[/I] then I'd get the hatred, but this shear hatred for what it really is, is so pointless. If something this simple is capable of making you angry and annoyed, tweaks must be made somewhere. :v: [QUOTE=Bernie Buddy;40890941] You can make anything into anything if you stretch and twist the word enough.[/QUOTE] That's a very good thing to do imo. I'm able to redefine the word "god", for example, to fit whatever I want it to mean. If you're able to use the word and someone understands why you interpret it in this way, then it can only mean good things.

[QUOTE=Tarmac;40885620]this thread so far: "look at me im so artsy! this piece of "muuusic" is very clever oh yees i like to fiddle with my bum when i listen to it oh yeah im an artist WHAT YOU DONT LIKE IT?!?!! BLASPHEMY YOU JUST DONT GET IT!! YOUR NOT CLEVER ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THIS MASTERPIECE"[/QUOTE] why are you so insecure about this

so when does he do a shadow kick

[QUOTE=AK'z;40891013]That's a very good thing to do imo. I'm able to redefine the word "god", for example, to fit whatever I want it to mean. If you're able to use the word and someone understands why you interpret it in this way, then it can only mean good things.[/QUOTE] Good things like what?

The internet: qualified for anything. It's definitely an abstract composition, but it does serve an interesting purpose once it's actually explained to you. I got to witness this piece back in my first year of college. Pretty hilarious to just sit back and listen at the confusion of those who had never heard of it before. Alas, it's most certainly a composition, it's been regarded as one since the day it was conceptualized. Stop fussing over eachother, jesus christ.

This is just silly. I mean sure, categorizing silence as music is an interesting idea, but this really doesn't seem like something that should be performed.

Abstract art is silly.

I personally don't consider this music in the same way i don't consider this art: [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_srOhGcGHvik/SrShoV1_QxI/AAAAAAAADUo/sXMpuiuB-58/s800/modernartviewer.jpg[/img] Just because there is interpretation doesn't mean it is good.

Alright, so based off what I've read here, 4'33" is really about "sounds that the audience makes" and more-so a statement rather then a song, however people still argue against "this isn't music" comments. Now, can someone explain to me - in a somewhat polite fashion please, this is an honest question - how the random chatter and noises of everyday life, and nothing else intentionally musically (like instruments or vocals or anything of the sort etc.) can be legitimately called or classed as music? That's probably why most people keep saying that it's not music, because there are no instruments or sounds being intentionally played in any beat, or rhythm.

[QUOTE=ubersoldier;40896819]That's probably why most people keep saying that it's not music, because there are no instruments or sounds being intentionally played in any beat, or rhythm.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musique_Concrete[/url]

-snip-

[QUOTE=ubersoldier;40896819]Alright, so based off what I've read here, 4'33" is really about "sounds that the audience makes" and more-so a statement rather then a song, however people still argue against "this isn't music" comments. Now, can someone explain to me - in a somewhat polite fashion please, this is an honest question - how the random chatter and noises of everyday life, and nothing else intentionally musically (like instruments or vocals or anything of the sort etc.) can be legitimately called or classed as music? That's probably why most people keep saying that it's not music, because there are no instruments or sounds being intentionally played in any beat, or rhythm.[/QUOTE] The point of the song and what it's about is indeed the sounds that the audience makes, but that is not the song itself, it is the tone that is played and composed. [editline]4th June 2013[/editline] That's how I get it atleast.

[QUOTE=ubersoldier;40896819]Alright, so based off what I've read here, 4'33" is really about "sounds that the audience makes" and more-so a statement rather then a song, however people still argue against "this isn't music" comments. Now, can someone explain to me - in a somewhat polite fashion please, this is an honest question - how the random chatter and noises of everyday life, and nothing else intentionally musically (like instruments or vocals or anything of the sort etc.) can be legitimately called or classed as music? That's probably why most people keep saying that it's not music, because there are no instruments or sounds being intentionally played in any beat, or rhythm.[/QUOTE] Because music is not defined as sounds being intentionally played in a beat or rhythm or even with use of traditional instruments anymore we left that definition far behind about 60 years ago, lol

[QUOTE=megafat;40896788]Just because there is interpretation doesn't mean it is good.[/QUOTE] So you deem what is art and what isn't based purely on if you deem it good. LOL