Sound is vibrations. It is that which can be heard by the human ear. It can be created from anything. Is silence a sound then, if it is the absence of sound? Can silence be music then (as John Cage had put forth in his art), if it is not a sound?
Most fundamentally, sound has been used for communication, to convey ideas and expressions, even time (church bells signal Christians to recite their prayers etc.) Sound has been used as a form of entertainment (different genres of music, concerts, performances, dances etc.). It has been used for therapy. Sounds have been used to consolidate the identity of a culture (national anthems) and hence differentiate a culture from another.
Neuhaus laments that what makes a sound an art today is not its aesthetic value but the fact that it is new. I believe that what makes sound an art is its ability to move people, to evoke emotions from an audience, to convey a message or express an idea as do all other art forms.
DeMarinis stated in the article that there were three sets of sounds that were heard from a phonograph back in the days and that included the intended sound, the background noise and the sound of the working instrument itself. Advancements in audio technology has managed to get rid of/decrease the last two and I think that as technology advanced, our sense of hearing as to background noise has dulled and we often neglect it.
