This is artwork, and your impression is largely irrelevant.
This sentiment that it's too simple or too unintentional reminds me of how I felt when I was 12 and laid eyes upon Clyfford Still's 1951-52 at the Chicago Art Institute. It didn't seem like art to me at the time, but now I see that it is- and that I don't get to define what art is or isn't.
I never said it wasn’t performance art through noise. It’s definitely performance art through noise.
It’s just that if there is any meaning to the word “music” above and beyond “structured noise” then I’m not sure this hits the bar.
@jedimastert commented below that in fact it was precisely this threshold which the artist was exploring in this piece, so instead of foreclosing on the discussion outright as somehow diminishing their work, maybe appreciate that there’s an interesting question here which actually isn’t just a matter of “turn off that god awful noise!”
Cage is performance art certainly but not, IMO, music. Again it’s something certainly up for debate. [2] But such debate reminds me of a particular South Park episode based in SF.
[1] - http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/product_info.php?products_id=...
That is not to say that all music must follow some prescribed form or another, but the distinction between sound and music is, at a minimum, structure and intent.
And it is also possible to intentionally structure some sounds in a way as to be not music, or unmusic, which is the impression I get listening to Four Organs.
Structured noise can certainly evoke an emotion — in this case for instance, confusion and disgust, and likely this is intentional. It may be an artform but I don’t think the noise is meant to be musical so much as it is meant to provocate.