Q: I know you already have answered a few questions on here about defining music, and I like your thoughts on it. Really, it doesn't matter what the definition of music is. It has no clear definition, and yet it still exists, people make it and people listen to it and buy it. There's lots of different ways people have defined music.. some have given really simplified answers. Edgard Varese has one of the most famous definitions of music as being  "organized sound." Frank Zappa said "a composer is a guy who goes around forcing his will on unsuspecting air molecules, often with the assistance of unsuspecting musicians." Barney Childs' definition is that "A piece of music is simply a chunk of time you are paying attention to with your ears." Others have given definitions that are more abstract, like Beethoven ("Music is the one incorporeal entrance into the higher world of knowledge which comprehends mankind but which mankind cannot comprehend"). You said 
"the onl
y way i really know of to define it is by making some of it, or finding some of it to listen to. then you can go, "ah, that's music. i think"" .... But if music is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder... where does that leave the composer/creator/performer? If someone makes something that they personally intended to be music, then shouldn't it music rather or not you or I (or any other listener) interprets it as such?
A: it is your choice what to call music. you don't even have to decide. might be more fun that way anyway