In that case, thank you for indulging me.

I am not so serious about music though I do enjoy and appreciate it.

Sounds like we agree about the ability of language to distract from music and it sounds like you are far more interested in the tonal layer of music that I am. It sounds you get more joy from its raw material.

I agree that language isn't required for communication. I also accept that music can be enjoyed without language and also in a language you don't understand. Where I think we might diverge is the depth of communicative capacity for both tones and language. I like the idea that there could be communicative depths in music that my attention defaults cause me to miss and are available to me with intention. I would accept that in some dimensions music can more deeply communicate than language, as I believe the converse. However, the "volume/area of" meaning that I was assign as more-or-less exclusively or best communicated with tones is smaller than that I would assign more-or-less exclusively to language (and more precisely to the invocation of the concepts referenced by language). Of course, my leaning is to believe that they can communicate even more effectively together in complement.

I'm not sure where the "music as an ideal form of communication" comment came from. Perhaps this was you indulging in something dear to you or proactively defending/limiting to protect or increase understanding? Regardless, I agree that conceptual transmission can occur in many ways of varying bandwidth.

There was a bit in my comment that you write adjacently to here about which I felt a little embarrassed. It was trying to summarize the communications and claim definite subjects. I was a bit embarrassed because I agree that many artists revel in the unfettered nature of their art. Claiming a particular topic can be seen as an attempt to limit and simplify which would be at least a little sad. There are definitely alternative concepts and summaries that I could have written and feel were covered just as plausibly. That flexibility is, I believe, often intentional and many songs invite the listener to explorations of the many possible dimensions and one can get lost into meta-narratives and their own dimensional possibilities. To briefly revisit the communication bandwidth topic, text has been found one of the least effective transmission forms. To any extent I seemed to be gatekeeping, I apologize and did not intend to (though talking about my internal confusion could be interpreted in such a way). To any extent you were concerned about gatekeeping, I didn't notice it. On the other hand, I could interpret that as a set up for the beautiful thesis you end with and with which I agree. I can think of other reasons than raising the collective consciousness, the mass transmission of messages meant to draw in a particular as yet unidentified individual for more proximal relationship (ignoring the intentional creation of parasocial feelings), to gather and/or organize communities for social experimentation or practice, or just collect capital. Still, the raising of consciousness, the sharing of perspectives, mutually supported growth, and so on is part of what I love in art most.

Thank you for the discussion, it has enriched my weekend.