ABSTRACT
Music, at its core, offers an intangible, amaterial, transient, and endlessly mutable form of expression. As complex patterns of pulses cast into motion, propelled through air or another medium, and ultimately given meaning through human intervention, music operates within the constraints of time and space. Music also appeals to a democratic ideal, particularly in this age of digital reproduction and portability: the ability to sense those pulses presents the only prerequisite for experiencing music. Interpreting music, however, is another matter. Anyone can do it, but everyone does it differently and for different reasons. A vast sea of writing and discussion has allowed people to promote ideas about the sounds around them: classifying music into numerous categories; linking specific sounds to one group of people or another; judging sounds as good or bad, harmonious or discordant, authentic or fake; and connecting sounds to places, events, ideas, emotions, or specific narratives. Even such measurable qualities as volume, pitch, rhythm, and timbre regularly receive subjective assessments. These attributes have made musical idioms deeply flexible forums for communicating ideas, values, and perspectives.
