Music, we are told by academics, consists of sounds that we have decided to call “music.” Tufts University professor Aniruddh Patel has declared that “there are no sonic universals in music, other than the trivial one that it must involve sound in some way.” This view is easily defended, as long as the concept of “meaning” is kept out of the way. Once the mere “presence” of sound is replaced by “meaningful presence” of sound, that definition falls to pieces. The sound of a flute and that of an engine racing have meanings beyond our decision to label one as music and the other noise. This distinction—mere presence versus meaningful presence—is the line that divides the warring sides of current Western thought. It’s sometimes hard to see where the line is drawn, but with music the picture is clear. Examples are as diverse as the repertoire itself, and it might be …