Different frequencies, different arrangement of tones and melodies, production and tonal qualities of the recording, and all manner of composition variations have different effects.
It might be crass way to say it, but it's a real worthwhile line of inquiry.
Don't think you can smack any beat on someone's head and it will cure cancer. It's not all equal.
Broad strokes here... if you look at another vibrational medium for parallels: the colour red can indicate something about the chemical contents of a material, and thus the effects it may have. A soft black carrot may not have the same beneficial qualities as a crisp red, purple, or white carrot...
What I’m hearing is “it’s different music.” Why does this justify a reduction to “sounds with a beat”?
In this case, I see multiple parties resorting to pedantry over a legitimate point of discussion, reducing to mud slinging over semantics. The point stands.
What’s the point that stands? How do you justify the initial framing of “sounds over a beat”
I was pretty clear in what I said about music. I wasn't the one who made that remark, so I don't have anything to justify except my own statements.