Talk:Biomusic

Work in progress
This page is in progress. Please help improve this article. --S.dedalus 06:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

nonsensical definition
First, you define Biomusic as "sounds created or performed by NON-LIVING things." and then you go on by talking about birds, whales an plants. This doesn't make sense at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.186.212.72 (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Biomusic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080511212137/http://www.georgecrumb.net/comp/voice-p.html to http://www.georgecrumb.net/comp/voice-p.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:49, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

A really weird passage
Under "Forms"

"It is important to note that of the more than 13,100 bird species, less than 100 have been accepted into Western classical or other music genres (or .007%). With the exception of entire biophonies, the abstract and deconstructed selection of particular birds (and the voices of a few other non-human animals such as certain cetaceans or canids) in these genres have been largely predicated on the convenient ways in which they happen to fit the models consistent with the then-current paradigms of the Academy – those considered to be "musical" at any given time.[1]"

This reads like some kind of criticism of the musical establishment for marginalizing animal musicians and preventing birds from making their own music. What a weird thing to say.

SacraConversazione (talk) 03:35, 23 June 2018 (UTC)