If music is moral because it communicates a message, then we must assume that language is moral. Are we to assume, then, that some languages are good and some languages are bad? The meaning of music is brought to the music by the listener. Those who claim that music has an innate message have to so that that message is agreed to by everyone at all times and all places.
Music does not require lyrics in order to have meaning. Musicians throughout the ages have known this well. If the meaning of music comes solely from the lyrics, why not just read poetry? Does all music have the same meaning? If it does, why are people so specific in their like of certain styles? If music does have meaning, why should we limit its meaning to the realm of that which is amoral? Do some things have a good meaning? Do some things have a bad meaning? Why can't music have a good or bad meaning? What self-respecting composer would set out to play music that has no meaning? Something that is amoral is neither good nor bad. Is it fair to say that most composers are trying to write something good? The fact that music intends to communicate meaning implies that composers believe it to be a language. The ability to communicate is good, therefore language is good. However, what is communicated through language is usually good or bad.
Meaning implies morality. Music has meaning as a medium. Music, as a medium, carries meaning. Therefore music is moral.
Music always has results, whether bad or good, negative or positive. Have you ever heard that there is a such thing as a tone of music? Horror movies have creepy and scary music and that has an effect on people who watch them. You wouldn't hear happy music with it. There's sad music at a funeral. There's dramatic music in action movies. There's suspenseful music when the director wants you at the edge of your seat. Music always has results. Some music makes your foot tap because of the rhythm. Some music makes you think and helps you concentrate. If music was amoral, music would have no effect on us but it does. It can have a bad effect or a good effect. It all depends on what music you listen to. There's immoral music that results in immoral actions. There's moral music that results in moral actions.
Rock stars consistently comment on how their music creates an atmosphere ripe for sex and drugs; and they're not talking about the words, but the BEAT! Satanists rely on their music to invite evil spirits in. Holy words sung to wicked tunes are sheep in wolves clothing. Jesus sang hymns (the last supper). If hymns were good enough for Jesus, should they not be good enough for you?
Morality is not a word used in Scripture. The word used is righteousness. Is music a-righteous? This question can only be answered, in my opinion, by determining the answer to another question. Does music communicate? Anything that communicates is either righteous or non-righteous inherently. Because I think that music is communicative, I do think that it has a moral component.
There is nothing amoral about music or any other art form. Such judgments are a result of humans and their need for religion or justification. You may find some music uplifting and inspiring, and you will undoubtedly find some of it base and disgusting. Just go with your own preferences and try not to judge other people for theirs.
As a musician, this question is pretty offensive. Certain music can be considered amoral, but is that music as a whole's fault? Absolutely not. That speaks more to the fact of the lyricists' morals, but not music as a whole. Music (I'm not talking about Lil' Wayne here, more like Herbie Hancock) can be a beautiful, pure thing in this world. It is only what people put on top of it with their hate filled lyrics that makes it amoral. The tons and timbres that we hear in music are some of the purest things in this life.
Music has long held power in out hearts and souls. It can be used to rile people or calm the savage and angry. Most religions celebrate with music and dancing as pure forms of communicating to their higher powers. There is more than one place in the Bible where music is used to praise God. There are songs that are expressions of anger and violence, but that is a healthier outlet than some other people use. In a lot of ways music is therapeutic, even if the words may not be "moral"
I do not think that music is amoral. I think that it is in fact quite the opposite, meaning that I think that music is a moral exercise. It can represent morality in a number of ways. It is representative of the political and emotional environment in which it is created.
Sure, some music could be defined as amoral, but that all depends on the morality of the person defining it as such. Most music could be seen as a reflection of the general morality that the world currently has. It is impossible to determine that music is in general amoral when it's actually a part of the morality that is present in a group of people.