Does a piece of music always have to contain melody, harmony, rhythm, dynamics, & tone quality?

Answer 1

Listen to "Aural sculpture" by the stranglers.

Answer 2

your question made me think of john zorn and some of his performances. he also plays with mike patton--and they have played guitars with keys and amp feedback and such as music--although it can sound like noisy scrapes and whistles not following any direction or time pattern.

music/art is so broad. . . does a piece of art have to contain a subject? is a golf ball splashed with paint and glued to a faux marble pedestal art? or a renowned "my five year old could do that" painting? to some it could be a deep commentary concerning money and country clubs and the repression of caddies or a representation of the world's colors melding together to form an image of anger or excitement. to others it is glorified junk.

to those who define music with the general and mostly universal rules you listed, yes, in order for something to be called music, it must have (at least most of) those qualities. to those who might call music an aural expression of anything, then no, music does not have to follow those rules.

Answer 3

of course, if you are to define music, it should have melody, harmony, rhythm, dynamics, & tone quality. If it lacks, then it's not defined as music anymore.

Answer 4

Melody, harmony, and tempo are necessary components of all forms of music, in my opinion.

Answer 5

no...have you lisened to PUNK music? With the rebel with no cause attitude of the punk era, music changed forever as we know it.

Answer 6

if you want to call it music it does!

Answer 7

NO! Think about RAP... it's nothing but noise!

Answer 8

no. what it needs most is SOUL