Sound is a wave, not coalesced matter. That it can be quantified with scientific technology - not the mind directly as when listening to music - does not change this fact. That is what I meant by "thing". In the context in which I offered it - which should dictate any response to it - a mind can not experience sound in an objectified way DURING THE LISTENING.
So, the question then arises: can the mind objectify a wave while listening? Or, can I use my thinking to identify a sound projection as I listen to it?
Question: when you are in a church listening to a solo singer, and you "notice" the location of the sound's origins - say, with eyes closed - do you do so with your objectifying cognition (thinking), or do you "see" the sound before placing that into thought? I would argue that identification by thought is, well, an after-thought, in the sense that you first "identify" the wave-thing without thought, and only later think about what you percieved, at which point the objective attached mind of thinking thinks that it identified the sound projection, when it was actually secondary in cause.
You can think about a sound projection later, or even measure the displacement or energy of a wave front with technology, later, but you can not "objectify" a sound wave through thinking WHILE YOU ARE LISTENING/BEING RECEPTIVE.
Thinking later about beauty, while a valid pursuit (what we are doing right now...) is not the same as experiencing it, directly, yourself, your own mind, no tool intervening confusing you that you have experienced a sound-thing.
Perhaps, I should reiterate: it is not necessarily the objectifying of thinking that is "bad" per se - obviously we here do a lot of it - but that an ATTACHMENT to it while listening to music, and, thus, a progressive attachment to progressively turn the soundwave into a more identifiable object (it is the progression that is symptomatic of this attachment, not thinking itself) prevents deeper experiences of musical meaning. And this is because the actual progression is one of progressive RECEPTIVITY, not the activity of the scanning thinking mind comparatively searching for more objects to dualistically compare.
Let science continue to tell us about the material plane, and let us use that information to go into our future and help us see what it and we could be, but don't confuse the measurement of sound as an object with the experience of music that is, by its nature, prior and beyond the desire to turn music into sound, and then sound into objects.
