http://www.newmusicbox.org/articles/defining-musical-quality/
Phil Fried
There is nothing here. The point being that you can't turn artistic questions into true or false.
Sadly every time esthetics are called upon it to deny some style of music the right to call itself music. In this case its the gesture composers calling out the the serial composers. No matter how incomprehensible the gesture composers approach is they never see their own limitations (or their commonality with serial approaches) only their supposed freedom.
Phil Fried 
Perfection can certainly be achieved abstractly except for one thing.
My problem is that unless we attach the system to actual music we have no idea what is what.
On the other hand there is good reason not to mention any music at all, because if you mention specific composers you will create problems for yourself, your colleagues, and your teachers. Real music would spoil the perfection of the system as folks endlessly argue the merits of this composer or that. (Or this teacher or that).
Since quality doesn’t equal success, real musical examples are dangerous because those who are deemed unworthy have a disconcerting ability to remain and prosper, and occasionally have influence on your career. Despite the tradition of inter school rivalry the teachers of the “poor quality” composers also frown on such criticism.
Acceptance of the musical world can not be bound by any system unless its a system of acceptance. We must all learn to live in a messy world.