Wth.. what is this.. where does this fit?

I agree it's a difficult listen, as I indicated in the OP I came across it by accident and it is one of the most extreme pieces I ever found, so was curious about what people here thought about it.

I think of myself as being extremely progressive in music and therefore tolerant of all ideas by artists, so often I just listen to something as a curiosity.  But, doing this I find interesting as sometimes I find things that I would otherwise not have found.  The late sixties is a hotbed for the unusual.

Interestingly, I came into the living room as my youngest daughter was watching a children's television program about music. The only reason I even paid it any attention is because Libby announced, “look, Daddy, the robots are listening to music, like you do. The only reason it held my attention is because it was one of those weird children’s television programs where they use quite adult language to explain a concept, so that it sounds quite out of place. It was all simple language, except that the robots were learning what makes the difference between what is noise and what is music. I can’t say I agreed entirely with how they defined it, but for the most part it was the most expansive definition of music I had seen for such a young audience, so I really quite liked it. Apparently, what turns noise into music is organisation (which is something robots very much appreciate), and what needs to be organised are five things: melody, harmony, rhythm, timbre and intensity. (At least, I think that was the five). But not all five need to be organised, and this is what often makes music for one robot noise for another, as different robots react to different things, depending on how they’ve been programmed.

I mention this, because the idea that “experimentation in music is essential, of course, but th result needs to be enjoyable”, is kind of a red herring. As while it might not be enjoyable, and therefore perhaps not music, to one ear, another might not only find it musical, but enjoyable.

Anyway, sorry, I just felt the need to say this, as it was so close to what the robots were discussing....

This is nothing, go listen to Iannis Xenakis's S.709 if you really want to challenge your ears

La Monte Young's music and drone music in general just doesn't do it for me. I'm fine with coarse musical textures and a lack of (clear) compositional structure, but I want pieces of music to continually engage me and I want to be able to find something new in a piece every time I hear it, and I don't get that with ultra-minimalist stuff like the track in the OP.

I genuinely find the Le Monte Young piece good.

I distinguish between personal taste and quality. Quality can be discussed, because it depends on point of view, core artistic values, your own cultural upbringing and so on. Personal taste can not be discussed.

I would regard the Le Monte Young piece as quality music based on my views. Then there is music I also regard as quality but which doesn't really appeal to me (Yes, for instance).

Admittedly, the two aspects (taste and quality) do blur quite a lot.