In defense of jargon

I don't like the way that I write about music. I just composed a long post about the differences Gladys Knight and the Pips' version of I Heard it Through the Grapevine and the Marvin Gaye's version. After I re-read it, I said to myself, "This is crap. I can't seem to articulate my thoughts properly. I know what I'm hearing, but I don't have the words to describe it." So I deleted it. This is something I find very frustrating because I love music and want to be able to speak intelligently, or at least coherently, about it. I find that I have a similar problem with the visual arts, but that it bothers me much less, simply because I'm less interested in them. The root of the problem, it seems to me, is that I never learned the vocabulary. It's difficult to thing about something if you don't have the words to think about it, and it's impossible to talk about. So I might hear something in a song, but because I don't know the proper way to describe it I end up talking all around it. In the hands of a very good writer this could actually be very interesting, but for the most part it just turns out incoherent. Anybody else who's had this experience knows what I mean. Nothing is more frustrating than knowing what you're talking about, but not knowing how to talk about it.