Well, realistically though - and I know your comment was rather sarcastic, but still - some people pay tons of money to go to a live concert, but nobody ever paid for a white noise concert.

So I think it is reasonable to say that pop music is worth more. Let alone the fact that it takes tons more work to create.

I fully acknowledge that, to the best of my knowledge, no one has tried to sleep better by congregating with thousands of similarly-sleep-seeking others into a jam-packed stadium.

I will also point out that, again to the best of my knowledge, extremely little money is made by the music industry on sleeping pills, sleeping hardware (beds, mattresses, pillows) and necessities (covers, duvets), nor on specialised sleeping gear (masks, blinders, apneu machines).

Also: most people try to or need to sleep every night, but can go without a concert for multiple days. If you can sell something on a recurring basis, you don't need to make a ton of profit on each sale to get a nice income stream.

Finally: I think it is harder to improve the sleep of someone struggling with that, than to create entertaining music.

Worth is entirely subjective unless there is intrinsic value in these things. For example - if no one listened to or interacted with either, would we still say there's value in their existence? There is probably very little. Otherwise, the value comes from whatever relationship the appraiser has to the music or sound.

Some people value sleep, others value sounds of nature, others value pop music, and others value money. The take on anything or anyone's value or worth usually tells us more about the appraiser than the subject.

Probably.

Yes, it is subjective for each person, but we can look at aggregate spending and based on that see that there is a lot of financial value in pop music, with a large industry around it. There’s no such equivalent for white noise.

But I like the way you think much better...