As that anecdote notes, the virtue of Solresol was that it was multimedia: it could be sung or whistled or played on an instrument as well as spoken and written. And its limited number (7) of syllables also opens the way for a number of shorter writing systems as well as various signalling devices (sign language, semaphore, and so on) without too much additional learning.
One problem with
Inevitably, in the early 19th century, this vocabulary was systematized -- more or less -- along the lines of philosophical languages: each syllable taken as first being given a category and then, within that, the second specifying a subject more narrowly. And so on. Certain simpler patterns were set aside for the crucial components: personal pronouns, "to be" and "to have", major prepositions and conjunctions. There was also the heuristic devise that polar opposites were reversals of one another (which disrupted the philosophical pattern). And there were other devices to help learning. Oddly, given the musical foundation and that the creator was a music teacher, musical symbolism seems not to have entered vocabulary building at all: no special place is given to various chords or their permutations -- or to discords, for that matter. Nor are the other multimedia potentials used - color wheels or finger symbolism, say.
Comes now the latest modern revision, Sarus, with the same basic scheme: seven syllable representable in a variety of ways. Words are again built with these, but with some restrictions and alterations that make a bow to actual speaking conditions. In compensation, Sarus allows words of up to six syllable, rather than only five, as in