>>11108960We like regularity, but also the irregularity (complexity) with that. There's also a lot of crossover between language and music. It's more of an extension of language at least in sound (obviously not in grammar). So much so that it only takes a small adjustment in speaking to be musical.
However, when it comes to Western music, especially the limited form presented by pop music, it's just social conditioning. This is clear because in traditions of music that are unsystematised or follow a different system to Western music, those conditioned passively or formally trained in Western music recognise it as bad, off or out of tune. Despite those traditions being much older and enjoyed by those exposed to them over formal training or pop music. Kinda like language, it's hard to hear and appreciate the sounds of a music tradition when you have not been raised with it. This is especially amplified by learning Western music theory which can lead to formally denying the ability for other systems or traditions to exist because they don't conform to the one you are raised with. Furthermore, look up microtonal guitar. This is basically a guitar that overcomes the issues with correctly tuning a guitar. Look at all the comments from unselfaware yet trained musicians calling it out of tune, despite it objectively being perfectly tuned. They are accustomed to the tuning of a usual guitar as well as the system of Western music that does not describe the objective reality of sounds but instead forms its own conditioned, idealised thing separate from objective sounds. This also, to a large extent but possibly not entirely, applies to the emotions we feel and associate with music. I'm sure the particulars of sound have a tendency to impart a certain feeling, but the actual feeling itself is conditioned and therefore it could be conditioned oppositely to this tendency. It's similar to attempts at prescribing feelings to different phonemes, vowels in particular, in language.
