I believe terms we can all agree on here will be descriptive, and therefore eliminate the use of "classical" for anything else but it's original (specific) musical reference. The style of music is the easiest way for *all to agree, and it is those unfamiliar (especially ones that organize music stores and (shame on you) radio stations) that make the decision to group all these together. You can't find Elvis and Brubeck (not the best example I'm sure) in the same stack (or on the same radio hz) for specific reasons... not instrumentation and not year of popularity... yet these distinctions become obvious only when familiar with both. I'm not sure if an acceptance of grouping Madrigals and what-ever-it-is-that-we-can-call-what-Philip Glass-composes together isn't adding "logs to the fire". The broader term "classical" comes directly out of not being *prone to recognize the difference, a laziness turned acceptance (perhaps)... (with no doubt) a definition after the true 'classical period' definition was *firmly in place...

Even the afore mentioned other uses of the broader term classical seem to be more specific than this musical use, and I'm only slightly perplexed as to why being specific here is different than all the other instances on this board where (G-d forbid) certain lines are crossed...

What was the AHD "thinking" when it allowed the qualifier "European tradition" into "the" book (don't start this one now, save it for a rainy day-shutting myself down-e).

...are particularly keen to assert their sense of ownership of the music heritage. Separating out lexical meaning and personal 'positioning'... Now, which music heritage are we talking about?

...commonly placed in apposition to 'popular', so you just have to discriminate based on the nature of the conversation... I do agree. However, rarely will I have a discussion (since someone brought up personal positioning) where the distinction between classical and popular is clear enough within my understanding of the words for them to make their point. When asked to be more specific, they usually can and do (or I do for them). If Scott Joplin (who is a classical representation of a specific style) and Josquin des Pres (is as well) are to be collected into a 'term' (still wondering why would we) it should be "classic music" (not classical) (are we back to the "functionality" arguement?)... besides, all classic music was popular at one point (he-he-he).

.. and on top of all this meandering, no one else commented about "painfully careful".