I think it's a well-thought out proposal:
a SONG (has a signature melody, the chord changes/modulations under it, the name itself implying ones ability to SING the signature melody, which I consider less important as I will describe) can be done in a Polka version, a Psytrance version, a Bossanova version. I'm sure you can picture "Happy Birthday" done in a million different ways, yet still retaining that signature melody. You will even EXPECT that a jazz version will alter the chord changes while still allowing the same melody to be contextualized over it!
It's true that mere sound-design accompanied by "contemporary rhythms" (as you say) will not have any CONTENT to be recontextualized.
Melodies are sequences of notes. Notes are ostensibly "pure tones" with a base root principle frequency, which is a lie, of course, as we understand that even a single note on the guitar string will have an entire correlated frequency system (harmonics/partials) related to a central main basic root frequency (tone), nevertheless, as all physical vibrations follow the physics of the harmonic series, regardless of medium, we will perceive a coherent "note".
There's some debatable degree of cerebral processing involved beyond the physical mechanisms of the human ear and the frequency "bins" it can perceive activity in. (resonant single-frequency sensors) but one can expect some memory of patterns here, and so one may expect some characteristic and unique "sounds" to be readily identifiable, regardless of their musical content. You will recall that being able to recognize the roar of a predator likely precedes music, lol.
Additionally, much as the sense of smell is pre-cognitive, there is also pre-cognitive auditory function, and I'll not go into this at this juncture.
What are the limits of human-recollection of distinctive sounds and how does this compare as far as broader definitions of a melody?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and also note that the vast bulk of dance music is a beat and bassline, whose primary purpose is to make physically impressive sound waves when projected over large sound systems, such that one feels suitably impressed and one feels like moving and dancing in response, as surely such an overwhelming force can be the equivalent of darkness in the discoteque, aka "normal" folks who would "normally" be embarrassed to dance and prance around do so with great abandon and alacrity.
Rhythm and characteristic sequences of this are an equally viable conduit to memory, however.
Our societies are biased against a rhythm-centric approach, but it's interesting to note that that 3/2 ratio is both a basic unit of cross-rhythm syncopation, and, when sped up, is the musical interval known as the 5th, which your fellow Greek, Pythagoras, is credited with noting in his studies of the tuned string and harmonics and musical intervals.
Ask any Punjabi about the Bhangra rhythms and if one can remember them as distinct musical patterns of some kind.
Or, those characteristic 60's and 70's funk soul motown etc drum-grooves, such as Clyde Stubblefield (James Brown's drummer) and The Winstons "Amen" grooves that are featured in countless hip-hop and electronica songs. (or rather, "tracks" as we know that they aren't songs, lol...even though a track is like a single instrument recording (1 or more channels, but commonly characterized as a single mixer "channel" even if there are 6 channels stuck inside, as in the case of 5.1 surround, lol...)
Alas, all 4 on the floor disco-based dance music styles bring absolutely zero to the table on the subject of rhythm. Future people will not be quoting our beats, lol