sound in the city

.. ASHGATE

4) Torstcn Wissman:n 2014

All rights rcscrvcd. No of this J>Ublicatioo may be: rcproduccd. stored in a system o r transmitted in any f(nm or by any means. elc.etronic. mechttnical, photocopying. rccording or othcrwisc without thc prior pcm1ission ofthc publishcr.

Torstcn Wissmnnn asscrtcd his nght ttndcr thc Copyright. Dcsig.ns and Pa.tcnts Act. 1988. to be idcntificd ns thc uuthor of this w orl.:.

Publishcd by Ashgate Publishing Limited Wcy Court :&tst Uoion Road Fnrnh.1m SuiTey. GU9 7PT England

Ashgate Publishing Compo'lny l lO Cherry Strect Suite J. J Burlinglon. VT 0540 1-381 8 USA

British Liba ry in P ubliclltion Olltll A catalog ue r.cord f(')r this book is awtilable from thc Rritish 1 ,ibrat) '

Thc Lihnuy o f Congrc!'!' lms cat:.tlugcd lbe pdntcd cdition ti$ fulluw!': Wissmaon. Torstetl.

Geographies of urban ::IOHnd 1 by Tor$1eo Wissmann, pages cm

lncludes rcfcrenoes and indcx. ISBN 978-1-4094-62 19-4 (hbk) - ISBN 978-1-4094-6220-0 (ebk) -ISBN 978-1-4724-0770-2 (cpub) l. City noisc--Europc-Cnsc studies. 2. City noisc-United States- Cas(: studies. 3. City and town ltfe- Eutope-Case s1ud ies. 4. Ciry and town lifc-Unitcd Stnlcs-Cnsc sludics. l. 'ltlc, TDS93.5.ES5W57 20 14 363. 74' J-dc23

ISBN 9781409462194 (hbk) ISAN 978 1409462200 (cbk - PDF) ISBN 9781472407702 (cbk cf>UB)

20D 045510

Prinlcd in thc Unitcd Kingdom by Hcnry Litg Limitcd. a.t thc Dorsct Prcss. Dorchcstcr. DTI JI-ID

Contents

List oj FiJtmT!s List ojTables Abouttlre Author Ad .. ?1owledgeme111s

Listen Up!

1

2

l

Tboughts on Sound ami the 1.1 Individual Perc.eption as Basic Requirement 1.2 Sense of Place: Coucepl and Multidisciplinary Theoetical

Approachcs 1.3 Googrophicol Studics on Scnsc of Place and Sound 1.4 Soun.d in the l-lumanilies

Sound Effects 2 1 Various Effects o f' &wnd oo !he J Jrban Dwfller 2 2 lJnw,.1n1i:d Souncl s 2.3 Wantcd Sounds 2.4 Thc /\bscncc of Sound

The [ndividual Soundscape

Sound in tbc Citv 3. 1 Soundscape S ludies in Acoustic Ecologv 3.2 Sound Recordmg in !he Field 3.3 Classifying Sounds m Dilli:rent Wars 3.4 Empincal Studics in Lisbon. London. and Auslin

U.

Chapter 3 Sound in the City

3.1 Soul)(bcape Studies i11 Acoudic

unJess we listen wilh attention. thel'e is n dangel' that so me of the more delicate and quiot sounds may pass unnoticod .. (Westerkamp 1974: n.p.). This quoto by l-lildcgard \Vcstcrkamp, mcmbcr o f thc World Soundscape Project. has a doublc mcaning. h rcfcrs to thc scnsc of hc.aring and thc nccd lo scnsitizc thc cars lo environmental sound.s. lt also testi fies to the situation scientific re.search was in, in tbe 1970s: Sound did nol play a major role in it. Truax, also involved in lhe Canadian World Soundscape Project. describes the sit11ation atthat time as

t1.1\ unfortunate lacuna as kll0\\1edge aboul hO\V sound acquircs m ea111ng and functions lO ceate social and psychological order J . .. J would be a S1gnifican1 contribution 10 ,., lht(n)' on which 10 base environmenta l musi (Truax 1996: S 1).

The study of environmental m u sic - the use of nature sounds to enrich music.al pieces or C01npose entirely new ones - involves an understanding of the unprtancc of sound JOr all pcoplc who :uc capablc of hcaring. "Anytlung m our world that movcs vibralcs air',, says MtuTay Scha(Cr ( 1969: 5), widcning lhc rese.arch area of sound lo include almost any environmenla l event. As m ay be lhe most nportanl characte r in soundscape-studies, Schafer mainly focuses on nature sounds lo sensitize botll public and science 10 sound. Tbe siguificance o!' sound cru1 be explained not only beca use of ils various etfecls on the utban dweller (see Chapter 2). but a l so from a hl.:,1orical point o f v1ew:

Oig noises Jike c.annons, church bells, steam engines and jets have c.hanged history ns much M> bld proclnmation.s. So hnvc .smoll sounds, pronounced in whi.spcr.s d andcstinc mcctings (Bull and Back 2003: 26).

As tal k has changed the course of histOI')'. language is always dominated by visual analogies (Tmax 1978: n.p.). The sound of a word ilsdf can be of 1mportance for lls mcaning, or cvcn - in thc case of :m onomalopocla or a "sound word" found in cat1oons or com ics- rcprcscnting this mcaning through pronunciation and accentuation (Bull and Back 2003: 30). On the one hand, sound is not easy Lo avoid. "The sense of hearing cannot be closed off at will The.re are no earlids" (Schafer 1994: 11) On the other hand. many sounds are overheard or anractlinle allenlion in the moden1 worl

114 Geographie:i o[ Urbau Sound

from a non-technologica] natural enviromneot. lf se.nsitized. he.aring becomes listening and even unimpre-ssive sounds are perceived and paid auention lo (see Rodaway 1994 3)

The princ1pal dirooli ve of lhe World Soundseape Project. "which wa at Snnon Fm::;cr Umvcrsity in Briush Columbia m thc carly 1970::;"

(\Vatcrman 2000: 112, scc also McCat1m .. y 2000: is lo documcnt ctwironmcntal sounds "and to promole increased puhlic awareness" (flruax 1996: 54) . At Simon Frnser Unive.rsity, Schafer, Tntax. \Vesterkamp, and others re.corded sounds and re-arranged them into envirotunental music collages. In this excellent .;Jimate for lhinking al>out and working witl1 enviromnental sound in C(lmext" (lvlcearch field omerged. loday decnbed a acoustic eco/ogy. In addition to co llccting cnvuonmcntal sounds for composing purposcs, d iffCrcnt cffccts o r sound on htunan bcings (scc Chaptcr 2) wcrc invcstigalcd (Waterman 2000: 112). Al Simon Fraser University lhe sludy hegan lo creale a common sense and both a 1heorecal and emprica( framework, which had been missing lo lhal poinl. TJws. when we look lo lhe body of Weslem research that deals with environmental sound. we find the glruing absence of a coherent knowledge base .. (TrWLX 1996: 51 }. For th1s purpose Schafc:r wrote his book The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environmeut and liJe Trmiug of the JVorld (1994). Looking at recenl bibliographies and citations since lhen, it is clear thal book has had 1he most impact on all follow-up in acoustic ecology and neighboring d isciplines Truax describes Schafer 's worJ..: as .. a largely descriptive basis for soundscape stu

Sound in the City 85

In bis understanding a soundscape is everything that can be heard, which makes the term rather difficult to describe. In comparison to its visual equivalen!, landscape , a soundscape cannot be displayed in a way that captures an entire scenery, as in a photograph. "The microphone [ .. . ) samples details. It gives the close-up but nothing conesponding to aerial photography" (Schafer 1994: 7).

The sounds of the world are thought of more as a "musical composition" than a noisy cacophony (Schafer 1994: 5). This leads to an artistic subfield in soundscape research: soundscape composition. Environmental sounds are recorded for eiectronic music, a totally new kind of music: "Little by Little throughout the twentieth centuy all the conventional definitions of music havc bccn cxplodcd by thc abundan! activitics of musicians thcmsclvcs" (Schafer 1969: 2). The result is a constructed soundscape like the one Schafer produced for the city of Vancouver, Ca nada (Schafer 1994: 59). Typica l sounds are recorded and afterwards mixed and arranged to create a hearable impression of thc city. This, in a way, answcrs Schafcr's own qucstion about which sounds should be "preserve[d], encourage[d], multipl[ied]" (Schafer 1994: 4), because recordings like the Vancouver soundscape not simply represen! the city of Vancouver in general, but the city of Vancouver in the 1970s. The statement that aU sound is music (Schafer 1969: 2), of course, isn ' t followed by the whole music industry. Canadian soundscape compositions mainly stay in the country. lntemational radio stations - that use music lo transport images and imaginations (see Bull and Back 2003: 36) - generally do not spend airtime on soundscape compositions.

The theory that all sound is music implies that the listener is able to deconslrucl lhe soundscape and sel single sounds into perspective lo fonn a more or less harmonic sound collage. This individual perspective on sound can be described as "acoustic communication" (Truax 2001 : xvii). Thus acoustic ecology is interested in the " relationship between man and the sounds of his environment" (Schafer 1994: 3). In contras!, 1-lildegard Westerkamp defines music as "enviromnental when it accompanies activities of daily life. In other words, the activity is tbe focal point, not the music" (Westerkamp 1988: 1).

Ovcrall, thcrc are too many sounds to ignore. Acoustic ccology 's fundamental idea is to learn how to deconstruct the SOLmdscape to make sense of it and Jet sounds appear less painful to tbe listener because of tbeir ascribed meanings (Westerkamp 1974: n.p.). Therefore, "we need to develop a new means for dcscribing thc sounds wc pcrccive" (Schafcr 1969: 30). Schafcr answcrs his own call with the deconstruction and classification of the soundscape's single SOLmds (see sections 3. l .l . and 3.1.2). 8ecause places are thought of as containing a certain unique soundscape and "sound picture" (Velasco 2000: 23), Schafer's empirical rescarch begins at specific locations that have special meaning for pcople. Knowledge of place-based sounds is believed to tell us more about ourselves and our relation lo our enviromnent: "We reach out lo the sounds because we want and need them for orientation and informatiou, for locating ourselves within a place" (Westerkamp 1988: 15).

86 Geographies of Urban Sound

3.1.1 Soundscape, Composition, Sound Events

At the place where a sound emerges the physical surroundings have to be investigaled. Every building, open space, even moving objects have an impact on sound.

The serious use of environmental sound , then, means to attend to the context and the integrity of sounds, to be aware ofthe relationships between sounds and thcir contcxts, and to work with a Jistcncr's associations and mcmorics of sound environments (McCartney 2000: n.p.).

Association with sound is especially importan! when the recorded audio materia l is used to compose a soundscape or a piece of music out of it. Relating to soundscape composition teclmology has evolved since the begiiming of soundscapc studics. " No audio technology, no soundscapc" (lgcs 2000: n.p.) is a simple bul lrue slatement thal highlights the dependence of soundscape sludies on technological devices. Without microphones and audio recorders, there would be no soundscape composition possible. When Peterson described lhe need for technology, recording was just moving from analog lo digital. With thc rise of digital recordings soundscape arlist got "versatile lools that make it easy to record and sample vast libraries of natural sounds. A composer can then selecl, modify, and assemble lhese sound biles in lo musical compositions" (1996: 401 ). The benefils of digital recording change not only lhe quality of recordings but recorded sound itself. White noise and other side effects of analog technology vanish and alter composing possibililies for lhe arlist.

Truax conc.entrates on the importance to the composer of the experienc-es, awareness and perceptions of listeners, and lheir relationships to the sound environment. These become an integral pa11 of the compositional strategy (McCartncy 2000: n.p.).

Thc vast possibilitics of digital rccording and post-produclion havc not madc thc use of "real" sounds obsolele. Soundscape composition "has evolved rapidly" (Tmax 2002: 17), but "[a]! presenl, soundscape composers rely on higb qua lity recordings of enviJomnenlal sound as source materia l, since no synthesis methods bavc bcen dcviscd whicb can produce rcalistic environmenta l sounds [ ... ]" (Truax 2002 17).

The use of only " real" environmenlal sounds suggesls lh at acoustic ecology 's soundscape composers could express lhe natural soundscape in lheir artistic collages. "But no recording is an exact rcproduction of living sound" (Schafer 1969: 45). This is no wonder, especially because constntcted soundscapes are not designed lobean exact replicalion of na tu re but often "ere ate an imaginaf)' world wilh processed sounds ofvarious origii1s ( ... ]" (Truax 2002: 7). Listening lo such a composition reveals tbe unrealistic characler created when certain mmatural


rhythms occur or a multitude of signi ficanl sound signals are strung logether. Bul single sounds can Slill be re-cognize.d. Summarized. soundscape composi1ion is one of the possibililies of ,volking with enviro,unental sound rel ating to individual perception and co gmtion of the world:

The pnnciples ofthe sounds:cope compusitton ,.,e. (a) JiSfel'lel' recogmz.ablity of lhC SOser's knowlcdgc of the cnvironmenttal nnd psychological contcxt of thc: soundscnpc material is .-.ltowcd to influcncc thc shapc of thc composition (M . 1. aJld ultimatcly thc composition 1s inseparable from somc or all ol' those aspeels of realil)'. and ideally. (d) lhe wot-k enhnnees our undetslandtng ot' the world, [ ... J (Truax 1996: 63).

To make use of envirotmte-ntal sounds for composil ion the recording bils 10 cilplure distinclive sounds like the bark of a dog or the ringing of a church bell. The members of the Wotld Soundscape Project ditf erentiate between environmental sound in its na rural oontc;xl nd storcd recording.

lAJny natuml sound, no maHer how liny, c.an be blown up and shot around lhe world , o r p ac.J..:agc-tl Qn tupe o r rcc.on l t(lr the gcncra lio ns of the f'uture. Wc lmve split lhe sound from the m:akers o f the sound. This diss-ocintion 1 c:all schizo>honia 1 .. ] (Schafcr 1%9: 43).

A rt.'COrdc. Weslerkamp 1988 7)

Thc quict ambiancc of thc hifi soundscape allows thc hstcncr 10 hcar ibrlhcr into the d1stan:.ce justas the countt)'Stde exeteises long-range \'ie,ving. nle city abbreviates this facility 101' distant hearing ( . .. ) (S

HH Geogrophie:i of Urbau Som1d

loudspeakers add to a cacophooy that ear)y soundscape researchers evaluated negatively. "In a .lo-fi soundscape individual acoustic signals are obscured in an overdense population of sounds" (Schafer 1994 43).

To be able to d asify sounds of thc soundcape and evaluate their individual unpacl on hsttncr :uul tht! cnvironmcnt. smglt; sotm to (he listener. /\s a sound a lways has a source and is located somewhere, the SlliiTQunding sounds might d ro \vn it out, or - even more impo11ant -the listener migbt not consider the sound meaningful enough to perceive it as a single sound event The social conlex codetennines whelher a single sound gets sing1ed out or not. Known sounds are more hkely co be expt.":rienced as sound cvents as they meaning and can act as a symbol - church be lls for Christianily ora s ircn as a wmnmg sign.

Allhough llave implied lhat every sound event in lhe acouslic community is unique in the infonnation it conveys, it is also ltlle tbat such occurrences are not random Over cotmtless repetitions. the images created in people 's minds by such sounds and their contexts build up coherent pallems that may be callcd sound symbolims (Trmox 2001. 80). 3. /.2 eyuote, Signa/, Souudmark

Whalthc nnalysl do fi rsl lo discovc-r thc-::;igniftcant lCnlurc-s of !he sounds.cape. !hose sounds which nrc important eithcr becausc of lheir individuality. lhcir numcrousncss or thcir domination (Schafcr 1994: 9).

BcCorc dcaling wi.th thc dcconstruchon of thc soundscapc it is important lo rcalizc that sounds are not only gcncratcd by thc surrounding cnvironmcnt. but thc listener herlhimself. One's own footsteps on the ground, and rusll ing of cloliling add to tbe experience of tbe soundscape. "Initially we become aware of lhe fact that we are soundmakers simply by moving through the soundscape" (Westcrkamp 1988: 15). As stated abo ve. what the listcners hcars is detcnnined by

Maestro


individual and social factors. But whalever meaning is ascribe.d to certain sounds, they can be singJed out or at Jeasl categorized into three different elements: keynote. stgnal. and soundmark.

l . Thc Kcynotc: Kcynotc a tcnn: 11 is thc note that idcntilles thc key or tonality of a particular composition" (Schafcr 1994: 9). In soundscapc studies the keynote has a d iflrent meaning. Keynote sounds a re those which are heard by a partlculnr S()ciety continuously or fre.quently e.nough to fonn a background against wbich other sounds a re perceived" (cited equally in Schafer 1994: 273. and Tnax 1978: n.p.). Examples would be

thm aru nol too dommant lO be singled out. In the wlldemess one might think o f thc wavcs gcntly reaching thc wmd moving lhc )caves o f lrccs, or birds singing thcir songs in numcrous voiccs. [n a cily the sounds or traffic would he an example. \Vilhin the sounds of msh hour no single vehicle cnn be isolated. Industrial sounds and e lectrical hums nlso CO\Ull for an urban keynote sound (Tnax 1978: n p .. Westerkamp 1988 14). Bul the keynole comains sofler sounds. too. " A sublle keynole is offered by the sounds o f hght. Be1wc-en the sof1 snifting of the candle and the stationary hum of clcctricity a \vholc chaplc r in human social hislOI)' could be wriuen ( ... )" (Schafer 1994: 59). The keynole can al so be linked lo lhe natural environment (Truax 2001: 25) . Climale, for example, changes the basic appearance of a soundscape. In winler. snow absorbs pat1 ofthe sound volume. and the cracking of frozen water a lso belongs to tite category of keynote sounds (sce Schafer 1994: 20). OveraiL keynote sounds are nothing spcc1al or uniquc but occur cxactly when ami how thc listcncr thcm lo. " Pcrhaps thc most common rcason Cor sounds to be hcard in background listening is that they are a usual occu1Tence, and theref'ore expected and prediclahle" (T ruax 200 1: 25). They, in a way, .. underpin( ... ) olher Jnore fugitive or novel sound events" (Schafer 1994: 48). In te rms of acouslics, keynote sounds are more o f a low-Irequency base lhan high-level pilch. They "shlY m lhe background of perceptJOn. ( ... ) ( and) do no1 inlerfere too grcally witlt forcground signals" (Truax 2001: 139).

Kcynotc sound-; contain a soci.al c lcmcnt that makcs d ifflcult empilical research. Derlning sounds as parl of the keynote is ahrays bnsed on socia l com1ota1ion and individual evaluatioo. "A keynole sound is nol necessarily a specific ty pe of sound. The tenn refers more to how it is petceived. that is. in the background of one s perc.eption .. (Woslcrkamp 1988: 14 ). Thal means thal any sound perccived by one pcrson as part of lhc kcynolc mighl stand out as uniquc from anothcr. Thc sircn of an ambulancc cnn cvokc distinctivc fccl ings or be cxpclicnccd as an ordinmy e lemenl o r tram e (see Truax 2001: 25). But sound can ha ve nn influence on people's behnvior (Schnfer 1994 48) In contras1 10 lhe constant sounds hearable in the backsround. the keynole makes its mosl impression whenever it vanishes. Often it is only titen that it is consciously

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

90 Geogrophie:i of Urbau Sound

pe rceived asan indispensable parl of lhe soundscape. Generally, key nole sounds ore heard but not olways octively listenod to (Schofer 1994: 9) Often they "al'e not co-nsciously perceived. but tbey actas conditioning agents in the percepuon of other sound signals .. (Schafer 1994: 273). Those other sounc..l Stgnals havc diffcn:nt mcanings for thc listcncr. Of these vnriations thc m osl basic fonn is:

2. The Signal : A signa) is a sound with a spec irlc meaning, and it o llen a direct [ ... ]" (Schafer 1994: 169}. In contrastto lhe

keynote. signals are- noticeable- sounds that are- consciously perceived. Church bells have already been named as examples. as has the siren of an ambulance. to thc keynotc, ::ignals are not s ignis by thcir csscncc but contain both in di vi dual and soc1al mcaning. lf s1gnals are distinctivc clcmcnts thnl cannot be ovcrhcard. Lht.y do not havc lo be listened lo automatically. Aull and Rack poinl out the prefe rence of busy people" tQ listen to signals of activity", forexample (2003: 38). As signals give us infonnation aboul lhe llstener wbo identifies lhem as such. they also coma in Lnfonnation about thelr source. as they ernanate frorn lodspcakcn). m olo rs. or rad10s. As p;:lrt of ;:1 ccrta in soundscapc lhey reft:r lo thc surroundi.ng kcynotc. Thcu rcOcction on walls and buildings pomts to the environment, where the signals occur (see Truax 2001: 47). \Vhat aH signals have in common is their importance for the community. Thus, they are onen described as community signals" (Schafer 1994: 178). Sig.nals refer to the character of a c.otnmunily wilh lhe special sounds lhey provide. It is nol surprising to hear cars honking in lhe downtown area. but not to hear a bikc bell on a bikc lanc. Onc would cxpcct lO hcar ch1ldrcn Cl")' ing at a playgro und and listen to a dog bark al an animal shelter. Oepending on buildings, tra rfic, and social factors like age. certa in sounds are representative of a community. Signals a1so mark the boundaries of communities. Some signnls can only be heard in spe.cific are as that are acoustically delimited by the aud ibility of their signals (Truax 200 1: 67). In any case. "[s)ig,nals are fore;round sounds and they are hslcncd lo conscious ly" (Schafcr 1994: lO). S.1rens from po hcc cars, ambulancc , and tire lrucks illuslra lc lhal signals a rc " mcant lo be Jistcncd to" (Tmax 197R: n.p.). Using an example from visual perception Scha rer compares signa! and keynole and growul (Schafer 1994: 275). lo study the various forms of signa ls Tnax suggests focusing on five different aspects . ncouslic characteristics, subjective perception. histotic.al unportancc. comparab1lity to keynotc ami o th(:r sign als. and symbolic powcr (1978: n. p.). Onc spccial typc of signal 1s thc S}' m bol. 11 has an cvcn richcrconnolati on and mc:ming and might t:rigge r s trongcremotions in Lhc listene r (Schafer 1994: 169). Signals o rhis to ric importance are s ingled out as o third sound.scape e lemenl:

J. Tbe Soundmnrk, A term derived from 'Jandmark' used in soundscape studies 10 refer to a cornrnunity sound which is unique. or posses.ses

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Sound in the City 9 1

quali1ie.s \Vh ich make il specially regarded or no1iced by the people in thal c.ommuni1y. Soundmarks. tBterefore. are of cultural and hislorical significance and merit preservation and protection" (Tn1ax 1978 n.p.). The unique character of the soundmark is :;tronger than thm of lhe signa l.

:;ignals occur m a highcr number. soundmark:; are uniquc. 1\ good cxamplc of a soundmark are Lhc bclls of Big Bcn in London. The inimitable tone sequence of the bells are an acoustic symbol of the capita l of (ireat B ritain. just as the To,ver B ridge is a visua) one. Every cornmunity has its soundmarks (Schafer 1994: 239), even if it might not be noticed as such by tbe local population (Schafer 1994: 240). In tbe

quaner of Lisbon. Porrugal. there 1s an unfathomable amount of chu")>ing and l wccling. Numcrous canary birds sit m u ny cagcs in thc opcn windows o f apa11m cnts :md fi ll thc air with a distinctivc soundmark. Thinking ahout those kinds o f signals mighl evoke memories of the past, as Schafer points out: "The band-operated pump. also on the decline. now snnps into memot}' ns n soundmnrk of my youlh [ ... J" (Schafer 1994 . 48). The last example illustrates that soundmal'ks are hniked to places just as they ire :mbjective memories. lf soundmarks are uniquc sounds (Truax 200 l: 67), it is bccausc of thc anchoragc ,,,..ithm the individual s tream of consciousness and the ass:ociations thal bind the sound to the listener. One the one hand. a soundmark is defi ned by its almost everlast ing being (Schafer 1994 239) On the other hand, there is the consta.nt threat of exlinction. Many soundmarks are no longer hearable. like the ones from medieval or Roman times. Because of thc1r strong connection to th.c lis tcner seems to be a nccd m many to preserve thc soundmarks by rccording and sto ring tbcm: 'Thc soundmark, his to rical, and d isappearing sounds, as well as the memodes of lhose who can recall the soundscapes of lhe past, are all wo11hy of presenation and respect" (Tnax 200 1: 1 06). As described above acoustic ecology has its problems with preserving sounds. Like the recol'ded sound event that is tran:;fonned into a soulless sound object, soundmarks cannot be saved caslly. Wilhout bcing cmbcddcd inw thc soundscapc Wllh all othcr kcynolc sounds and signaas, thc soundmark loses its authcnticily and degenera tes into yet another sound objecl. Schafer and the World S01mdscape Project nevertheless try 10 preserve many preciou.s and not-so-precious sounds. How sound recording is approached will be discussed in the following section.

3.2 Sound Recording in the Field

There are various ways to record a soundscape. lvlost diverse a.pproaches lead to numerous results that vary nom teclulological accuracy to individual originality. Active listening can be c.onsidered the starting point of soundsc.ape

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro

Maestro


studies. "Thus our first question is 'What do we hear?"' (Gaver 1993: 3). The first attempts to sensitize 1isteners to souncl were the listening sessions of Murray Schafer (Schafer 1969, 1970, 1994), the raw recordings of Barry Truax (Truax 1978, Tntax 2002), and the soundwalks of llildegard Westerkamp (Westerkamp 1974, 1988), all members of the Canadian World Soundscape Project. Oecibel measurements belp to learn more about cet1ain qualities of sound, while participan! observation, individual descriptions, and narrative interviews are focused on pri marily. All these methods are considered souncl recording, as experiencing sound and describing it allows us to understand individual relationship of the listener to the sound environment.

As scction 3.2.2 will show, today individual findings bccomc lcss importan! in favor of the more and more popular GIS technologies. Maps are created digita lly, and visual design guides are invented to display sound qualities like energy and pressure leve(, frequency, and rhythm (Kornfeld 2008, Komfe1d, Schiewc, and Oykcs 20 11 ). Noise, especially traffic noisc in urban arcas, gains in importance. Research tries to present noise ca lculator software packages (Farcas and Sivertunb 2009), and "characteri stic aud io sequences [can be found) in common 30 city mode1s" (Schiewe and Kornfeld 2009: 1). 30 replaccs 20 mapping in digital terrain modcls, when terrain ancl builclings are displayed to calculate the impact of the physical environment on sound and its spatial reach (Arana el al. 201 1). Even ti me is added to sorne simulations as a fourth dimension. Approaches tty to cope with the fact of a constantly cbanging sound environment using a series of consecutive scenarios (Pamanikabud and Tansatcha 20 10).

Oecibel measuremenls support studies on noise with detailed recordings of tbe sound level at a given location during a certain amount of time. Values for day, evening, and night are separately measured in the field (Makarewicz and Zltowski 2008). This most cost-intensive method is contrasted by the use of existing statistical data lo ca lcula te noise levels. Guiclelines like !hose in lhe Europea u Union belp to maintain the balance between cost and accuracy (Europea u Commission Working GroupAssessment ofExposure to Noise (WG-AEN) 2006).

Standardizcd intcrvicws havc bccn uscd sincc thc carly soundscapc studics of the World Soundscape Project. In questionnaires, researchers try to find out about the individual experience of the soundscape and people's preferences and feelings about sound (Raimbault, Lavandier, and Brengier 2003). lnterviews can takc place in thc ficld or under laboratory conditions (Irwin ct al. 201 1 ), and experts may be questioned (Raimbault and Oubois 2005), as well as passers-by and users of specific locations (Kang 2007). Sometimes sound samples are integrated into tbe questionnaires (Ge and Hokao 2005). Other studies take sound samples whi le conducting interviews (Schulte-Fortkamp and Genuit 2004). Narrative interviews are primarily used to pretest the questions and topics of a questionnaire, lo leam aboul individual preferences with as much detail as possible. GJS-based models calculate noise levels (De Coensel et al. 2005), 30 models seem to be most sufficient for souncl mapping (Krygier 1994),

Sowrd in tire City 93

and field recording has been pelfected regarding sample points and sound quality (Pamanikabud 2009, Tsai, Lin, and Chen 2009). To find out more about the impact of sound on the active listener and any person passively consuming it, individual focus also has to be covered in today 's soundscape research (lges 2000, Papadimitriou et al. 2009).

3.2.1 Methodology According lo the World Soundscape PJ'Oject

In 1973 the World Soundscape Project published wbat was to become the first popular study on urban sound: the f ncouver Project. Audio recordings and an accompanying booklct tcll about Vancouvcr's most typical sounds in thc l970s. Me1odologically, the participants o filie project, like Muna y Schafer, Barry Tmax, and Hildegard Westerkamp, didn 't bave any blueprint for how to accomplish sucb an undettaking.

[T]he intent was to document and re-present recordings of various sonc environments to the listener in order to foster awareness of sounds that are often ignored (Truax 2002: S).

According to the scholars, sounds not noticeable at first have to be listened to very closely lo altract listener 's attention. So, the act of listening is of te highesl importance. Schafer often started bis classes by letting students sit still and listen to the enviromnent. "The class had done this for four days n mning, ten minutes each day, chairs t11med to le wall, receiving sound-messages" (Schafer 1969: 5). After that, students discussed their impressions and fi ndings and thus slarted to refiect on sound and tbe soundscape. Before any other method can be applied, soundscape recording has to statt with active listening to - not only hearing of-the most basic sound elements. "The first way is to cultiva te the ha bit of listening. Listen carefully with seismographic delicacy lo 1e sounds of the environment around you" (Scbafer 1970: 3).

Listening to the sounds of a classroom might be a good statt, but to experience thc wholc rangc of cnvironmcnlal sounds thc listcncr has to be in thc ficld. Hildegard Westerkamp describes walking le streets and paying attention to !he multiplic ity of sound sources as a "soundwalk" - an "excursion whose main putvose is listeni.ng to the environment" (Westerkamp 1974: n.p.) and wbich starts as attcntivc walking and intcnsivc, but nondircctional, cavcsdropping. (Wemer 2006: 1 1 5) These walks are often recorded, though the listener's own walk ing sounds and breathi ng and other interferences have lo be ignored when play ing back the recording. Video might al so be u sed lo make deconstruction of the tcchnically preserved soundscape easier. Taking pictures during a soundwalk Cllll al so help to clariJY le aud io material, although the sound of the release of the camera might be recorded, too.

Soundscape recording has been significantly changed over the last 40 years. What started with "a stereo Nagra IV-S ancl a pairof AKG condenser microphones"

94 Geographies of Urbau Som1d

(Truax 2002: 5) has tumed iltto digital recordutg with notebook COLnputers and .. the 8-channel spatialization of environmental sound" (Tntax 2002: 5). For their r (mcouver 1973 projectthe World Soundscape Project did 24 -hour recordings of a cerhllll :;ite to produce a one-hour composJlion. As nowd abo ve. he presence of the li::;tencr, J.c .. the rcscarchcr, can a lso be found in thc rccording. if s/hc carrics thc rccordings dcvicc(s). E ven in thc case o f iJ flxcd installation using a tripod, \Voemcr po ints out that the mere existence of a recording device on sile a lters the recording, nol leasl because of the physical presence of deOe.cling sound (2006: 7 5-6). In order to in crease the fidelity of the recordings and bring them closer to notural hearing conditions. the World Soundscape Project used a binnural recording mcthod, W1lh "the rccor(hst u:;ing his!her own pinnae with th..: mic::rophoncs placed m thc cars. or clsc artillcial pmnac atl.achcd lO thc microphoncs thcmsclvcs" (Trua" 1978: n.p.).

\Valking through the c ity and record ing the soundscape can he accompnnied by decibel measurements - another way of revea]ing the soundscape Schafer did tbis while walking his students resident ial areas (Schafer 1969: 13).

Thc decibel ts a unil lbr measlll1ng the intensity of sound. llts used to cxprcss. the relalionship between the f intest soutld rnan can hear and othe sounds in the. environment (Schatt 1970: 2) .

.. 0 dB is defined as the TI IRESIIOLD OF IIEARJNG" (Tntax 1978: n.p.). While 140 decibel hearing is possible. numbers as low as 90 can cause pennanent damage to the hum an ear if exposure time is long enough. Table 3. 1 shows decJbe l lcvels J r (hffcrcnt common sounds. mcluding the maxmllun tune of exposurc bcforc thc possibilily of hcaring damagc. Thc dccibcl scalc is logarithmic, "so that an incre.ase of 10 decibels mean a tenfold increase on sound intensily" (Scha fer 1970: 2). Two sounds of the same decihel level combined do not double the loudness but rather the measured decibel leve! by three (Tntax 1978: n.p.).

There is another way of measuring sound tht is le.ss technologwal. Schafer uscd clcscnptions o f sounds hcard as a w ay lo lcam more about thc soundscapc. Dcscribing sound Jcads to classitlcation, for cxamplc, human. naturc. or technQiogical sounds (see section 3.3) . The naming o f sound sources cnnnot only be appUed 10 the enviromne.nt of tbt:: Ustene-r bul media as weiJ The sounds of objects and charac1ers in a piece of art. e.g . in paintings or writings. can be analyzed. If a blacksmith is displayed swinging bis hanuner. Ibis implies the sound of forgmg stcd. Crows in the trees 1mght evokc their croakmg. Pt."'plc descnbed as rushing ttuough thc s trccts makc onc tltink aboul shocs hitting thc asphalt. Thc dcscdptions o r all thosc sounds are bascd on thc linguistic poss:ibilitics and thc stream o r consciousness o r the researcher. ''We on ly sampled at random, of course, but perhaps cet1aill conclusio11s could be drawn" (Schafer 1969: 6).

Perhaps the mosl individualislic form of ooundscape recording is base(! on partic ipant observation. To write down what listeners experience while listening to


Tablc 3.1 _Decibel Compar i."on Cbart

Dishmct (dB (A)) (mlft)

Airplanc 130 100 328 Fog horn 130 1.000 3.280 Li ve nlllsic conccrt 120 o o Ambulancc sircn 110 10 n Disco 110 o o iPod (incor hcadphoncs) 109 o o Car horn 100 7 22 Lawnmowcr 100 1 3 Church bell

% Geogrophie:i (1 Urbau Sound

According to Schafer, there are three d ilf!re nt notal ion syste ms that c an be applie.d lo sound:

Wc ha ve tltrcc graphic notational systcJ:ts availablc:

th:n uf acoustics. by which the mechanical propertics of souJ1d nay be exatly d escribed on papt r ora calhOdC- 11'1)' thnl of phonctics, by which human spcech m uy be projc.ch:d and

musical nowtion. which pcrmi!s thc rcprcscntation of ccrtain souods posscssing. ' musical iCaturcs (SchaiCr 1994: 123).

/\11 thrcc systcms are dcscriptivc and can display sound loan cxtcnt thal simply talking about sound cannot cover. Rut notation is only applicahle for ce11ain sounds. like single sound evenls ora collage of clearly idenlifiable sounds. Whil< m u sic - Scluer cnlls il an organized fonn of sound ( 1994) - can be decons1n1cled into octaves and notes. the imerplay of cnvironrnental sounds has w be recorded m a way. Aemll projection is one method tht! \Vorld S


The environme.nta l aspect of soundscape composi tion can be heard in lhe works of l-lildegard Westerkamp. She collects sounods to recycle tbem for val'ious pul'poses llke movie scores. concerls. or sound installations \\'el'llel' describes how We.sterkamp u:;es the SOl.UJds of the hom.s of .ships to ere ate "harbor mu:;ic ., and tran:;fonns thc sound of breathing mto rdaxallon compo::;iuon:; (scc Wcmcr 2006: 139) . Likc thc Vancouver Projcct in 1973, sound.scapc compositions not only sensitize the l.istener lo the acoustic environment. bul it also serves as a way of communicating tbe rese-archer s message:

fl\

98 Geographie:i oJ Urbau Sound

nmdoml}' ni the d ishmccs 1m fur1hcr flom lhc edg.c f nc.ur frontugc road (Pamaniknbud 2009: 2$)

Employing the righ numberofrec-Ording, pomt:-> is important for gening significant mforrnation about the local soundscapc. Arana et al. come to thc conclu::;ion "that mapping with a 0.5 m dcgrcc of nccuracy in clcvation is suficicnl for acoustic simulation" (2011: 522). For studies on haffic noise this short distance is not needed. The study ofTsai et aL . for example:

cstablishcd 345 tcmporary noisc monitoring st::ttions in the T::.io;:m mctropolitan arca r ... 1. To sclcct thc locations of measurin,s points. thc Ta1nan mctropolitan a.-ea \VttS divide.Papadimitriou el al. use fewer sta tions but a tighter grid o f 350m d istances. l11e purpose of posit ioning microphones this way "could ensure the recording of a great variety of sounds from different sources. and allows the interpolation of the collec\ed infonnation .. (2009: 129).

The interval1s o f equal1mportance. To gel a sample for sounds hke trame no1sc, diffcrcnt times and days, cvcn months and scasons. are of imporlancc. TraHic density varies between day an.d night, weekdays and \Veekends, and summer and winler (see Ge and Hokao 2005: 458, Tsai, Lin, and Chen 2009: 964). To process traffic noise data the averagiug of dedbel values is conunon practice. The average sound level L is uS\Ially d ivided into three sections day. evening. and night (Makarcwicz and Zltowski 2008: 3568). The exact time when the cvening cnds, the night starts, and the d:;1y bcgins dcpends on the gi ven sJtuauon. Thc "[d]cfault dural ion dcflncd in lhc END [cnvironmcntal noisc dircctivc of the European llnion] : day ( 12h: 07:00 - 19:00), evening (4h: 19:00- 2:1:00), nighl (8h: 23 :00-{17 :00)" (European Commission Working Group Assessmenl of Exposure lo Noise (WG-AEN) 2006: 63). The average sound Jevel of day. eveni.r'lg. and night combined is named

Problems recordmg sound generally do not occur because of technology but lhc charactcr of thc cnvironmcntal soundscapc as a cacophonic of kcynolcs, signals. and soundmnrks. Thc inlc.rplny of sounds and thcir sourccs with the physical environment conslantly ahers the single sound.

[M]uc.h ofthe sound thnl us from sourcc has rcftecled off vnrious othcr objccts in thc cnvironmcnt. wbich colour thc spcctnun of rcflcctcd sound just light is colo u red by thc surfaccs it strikcs (Ga\'er 1993: 4).

This shows again how crucial prclcsting can be./\ prctcst can rcvcal thc importancc of a sound IQr the overall soundscape and ils significance arnong the other sounds. Bnckground sounds mny be singled out nnd be considered i11fluencing fnclors for the sounds that gel recorded ill tbe final study (Pamanikabud 2009: 129). lll the end, the act of rOOrding itself alters the sound (see abo ve). It d

Sormd in tire City 99

a copy of reality but refiects it under certain circumstances (like the positioning of micropbones). The result " is a kind of sound mirage: an acoustic image which may aim to represen! the reality in question, while actually presenting a distorted reflection which, al besl, captures the aroma ofthe original" (lges 2000: n.p.). This, of course, refers to the nature of sound that is so importan! to acoustic ecology. For traffic noise measurements and GIS models the difference between the natural sound event and the preserved sound object is inexistent.

In the Good Practice Guide for Strategic Noise Mapping and the Production of Associated Data on Noise Exposure the European Union describes di:fferent possibilities for acquiring sound data (2006). For various measurements like the sound of hcavy vchiclcs, road surfacc typc, or spccd tluctuations at road junctions a toolkil is provided to the member states. On-site recording of the soundscape is always an option, but statistical solutions are offered, too. Generally, field recordings are the most complex, most expensive, but also most accurate way of acquiring data. The cxample of traffic tlow illustratcs thc proccdure. lf no data of thc traffic flow at a ce1tain crossing, tor exrunple, is available, researchers have the option to "(m)ake lTaffic counts for each of the three periods: daytime, evening and night time" (European Commission Working Group Assessment of Exposure to Noise (WG-AEN) 2006: 59). Complexity is very high, increasing with the number of vehicles and their speed. This method is extremely expensive, as a certain number of people have to count for a long period of time, whi le eJTors can be avoided best if severa! researchers have the same area to cover. The final data set will have a tolerance of at most half a decibel. If a city council has to create a noise exposure map covering all major roads, a complete counting is not an option. lnstead, it is possible lo "[s)elect sample roads and do traffic counts there; extrapolate lo other roads of same type" (European Commission Working Group Assessment of Exposure to Noise (WG-AEN) 2006: 59). Tbe complexity stays as bigh as before, but cost might come clown a little, depending on the number of staff. Accuracy goes down to plus or minus two decibels. A much easier and more cost-efficient way lo gel souod data is to " [u ]se official [ or other) traffic fiow data for ty pica! road types" in the country or region (European Conunission Working Group Assessment of Exposurc to Noisc (WG-AEN) 2006: 59). In tcrms of accuracy - thcrc can be momalies of up to four decibels- this method delivers the same results as using the default values of the European Commission, provided in the Good Praclice Guide. The only complexity left is to add up the different road types like se1vice roads and collccting roads, and to apply standardizcd valucs for day, cvcning, and night traffic to them (see European Commission Working Group Asses;,ment of Exposure to Noise (WG-AEN) 2006: 59). 1-ligh costs of individual counting lead lo the fact that documents like noise exposure maps of urban areas are generally produced using statistical data. For every study " [t]hcre is a need to compromisc between the accuracy in the determination of L,,.., and limited resources of input data, the measuring equipment, and time" (Makarewicz and Zltowski 2008: 3568).

Recorded sound data has to be processed to draw conclusions out of it. One core geographic way to do this is mapping. There are various possibilities to approach

100 Geogrophies of Urban Sound

sound mapping and it seems that it is far from being perfect (Gaver 1993). Certain qualitiescan be visualized, like sources, reach, pitch, or decibellevel. But at least one element cannot be shown in traditional maps: time. As the sotmdscape consists of many inleracting sound events lhe as-is stale is changing constantly. Noise mapping along a railroad track, for example, depends tremendously on the sound caused by passing-by trains. Average values like L.,, are not sufficient, as the highest decibel peaks are of importance. If a " traffic noise simulation model in 3D form is applied on a GIS system" (Pamanikabud and Tansatcha 20 JO: 1 1 85) free-flow sound can be investigated. "[ C)olor-enhanced noise contours on the ground and building surfaces" can be added to make changes visible (Pamanikabud and Tansatcha 2010: 1193).

In static models this problem can partly be solvcd with a time series of diffcrent scenarios. Calculations and visual ization are mostly done in GIS software. This helpful tool was not avai lable to the World Soundscape Project in the 1 970s, but GIS software researchers today are able to produce severa! mapping concepts for onc sccnario using high-pcrformancc computers (Kornfcld 2008): "According to our encodings, we bui ld a high-level design gu ide for the visualization of sound" (Komfeld, Schiewe, and Dykes 201 1: 26). Visua lization varies from point signatures for sources or recording points to lines, pixels, and areas for reach, loudness, and othcr sound fcatures. "The natural shape of sound is a wave traveling through air. Dueto Jarge sea! es, this is abstracted to a simple geometric shape of sound" (Komfeld, Schiewe, and Dykes 20 11 : 17). A wave lying over an urban area is not displayable in a 2D environment. Auralization is one way to solve the problem. "[lv!]ethods of traditional, digital and multimedia cattography as well as the integration of characteristic audio sequences in common 3D city models (auralization) are intended lo be incorporated into the urban sound cartography" (Schiewe and Komfeld 2009: 2496). Different color-coding helps deconstrucl the soundscape. Single sound sources within a wave (or simi lar representation) show how the soundscape is build u p. Sources are categorized into traffic and economy, human activi ty, and nalure sounds. Color gradienls s ignify sound energy and sound pressure leve). Spatial reach and rhythm are displayed with colored areas (Kornfeld, Schiewe, and Dy kes 2011: 26).

Thc focus of GIS-bascd approachcs to mapping sound varics, from displaying large areas like cities or agglomerations to the description of single streets or pub le green spaces. Depending on the study, new software solutions are presented (i.a., De Coensel et al. 2005, Farcas and Sivettunb 2009, Kornfeld 2008) that all use slightly diffcrent color-coding and catcgorization systcms. Tsai ct al. , for example, work with a green-to-red sea le symbol izing "[w]inter noise distribution in Tainan City" during moming, aflemoon, and evening hours (Tsai, Lin, and Chen 2009: 967). To display "[s)ummer violations of noise regulations" the authors decide to move from yellow to red and skip the grecn hues because the negative connotation of noise is in conflict with the positive connotation of the color green (Tsai , Lin, and Chen 2009: 968).

A 3D model contains as many physical objects as possible. Not only the terrain but buildings and other structures are worked into the simulation (Arana


et a l. 201 1: 522). The results of the added noise data fina JI y depend on the accuracy and the number of recording poims.' \Vith a venical resohnion of0.2 m. 1he resu11s are vit1ually idemica1to those obtained for a 0 -tolenlllce from ou1' view point. mppmg with 0.5 m m vertical accuracy 1s sufficient fcr nc.oustic simulation" (Arana e t al. 201 1: 526).

/\s discusscd carlicr (scc 1.4), 3D modcls sccm lo be tr.orc cffcclivc for sound mapping (Ktygier 1994: 149). Flut even though GIS offersenonn ous possibilities for visualizing sound in maps:

thc task of actual! y dcscribing and depicting the soundscn1>e is more than noise mapping. SlllCC as thc communication modcl implicd by Tnmx r ... l subjectivtty is inseted to the observati011 (Papadimiuiou el al. 2009: 127).

Research on sound in disciplines like social geography fo:::uses on the individual nnd conunon percep1icn of sound. and not so much on its physiologicnJ extension. This mean. that 3D models thal include terrain . buildings. and vertical sound emiss ions. and even a:lnated 4D models with the capability o display changes over um.;, are not prin:mly of mt.;rest. Tradillonal 2D cartography W1th dala on sourccs and rcach of soun d sccms to be appropriatc . Onc might be ta ller than a nother one and thus receive sounds differently. But thc possible discrepancies cause.d by a slightly different sound mixture can he neglected. The highly vary ing experiences of sound thal are based on individuality. social conlexl. and one 's own stream of consciousness are far more importnnt

Qualitati,e and quantitntive inte rviews offer the chance to imegrate an m(hvidual aspect inlo sound recording. Th at 1s \Vhy somc studtcs conduct mtcrv1cws wh1lc rccordmg aud1o dala m lhc r1c ld s tn uHancously (!>chultc Fortkamp and Genuil 1004: 2496). Ra imbault el al., forexample , descrihe .. a cross analysis of survey dali!. and ac.oustic parameLers, describing typical ambient urban sound enviromnent" (2003 1242). At evel) ' audio recordiug location people were asked questions about the local soundscnpe. using n qucstionnaire. Qunlitnve narrative lnterviews had been conduced first to bmld up a base for the qunnitti ve questions (Raimbault, Lavandicr, and Brcngtt:r 2003 : 1244). lt scc.:ms that two typcs o f qucs tions wcr-:! most hcavily uscd to find out more abo ul thc rcspondcnts' soundscape experiences:

The scmantic dilracntittl profi les of soundscape are uscful in helping us to undcrstand lhe pcrccpttml na tu re of thc sound environmcnt of urban slrcct arcns. and to crcntc dccpc; contcxt of soundscnpc (Gc nnd Hokao 2005: 465).

/\sidc from thc scmantic diffcrcntial (nlso scc Rnimbault, Lavand icr, and Brengier 1245}. S-po int and 7-point sc.ale questio1s were named to help quantify one's persona) feelings toward a sound, regarding liknbilily. loudness. and fanli1iar ity. "The inte rvie,vees were nlso asked lo classify al least tluee sounds as ' favourite. eJ. ' neither favourite nor OlulOying. :N). or ' annoying. (Ar

102 Geogrophie:i of Urbau Som1d

(Kaug 2007: 56). The sounds in this were prerecorded inthe neighborhood and replayed to Jhe respondents To ensure identical condilions during questioning. so me srudies conclucJed interviews in a laboralOt')' (hwin el al. 20 JI ). As Jhe fi rsl pn::lesl in Lisbon (see 3.4.1) will ::;hO\\'. it 1s al::;o po:;sible to randomly que:;tion passcrsby all ovc:;r a predcfincd art:a. Thus. thc group of rcspondcnts can d illCr from a random sc lcction or pcopJc on si te to rccruilcd sound cxpc t1s, d ividcd by age. sex, and know ledge.

Nanative ln terviews are less conunon in today s sou ndscape resenrch. Somelimes used as a pretest to cover possible questions fo.r the quantitative questionnaire. it seems that highel' levels of individual answers fl'om the Jumave mtcrvicw do not \VOrk wdl in combintttion with audio record ing and statistw:.ll data. J-lowcvcr, to gain initial background infonnatlon on a ccrtam narra ti ve intcrvicws can be o f valuc . In thc case o r Ra imbault and Dubois:

[i Jntcrvicws of : rcprescnt:li\'e panel of f rcnch planucrs wcrc thcrcforc :naly;cd in ordcr to undcrstand thcir conccming thc place and u tility of so\lnd ambicnt cnvironmcnls mban projccts (2005: 341).

Gathcrcd data ts analyzcd digitally using software likc MI\XQDI\. allas.h, and Nomino. The combination of interviews. recordings. and statis tical data can nol only ensure accuracy hut integrate the individual elements o r sound percept ion that were once the s tart ing point for World Soundscape Project soundscape s tud ies

3.3 Classifying Sountls in Diffcren1

In the field. recoTding techniques vary. from descliptions to audio recordings. Tbe documenlalion of Lhoughls and audio dala nlways includes calegorizalion and classification. For Jhe World Soundscape Projoct, Schafer describes a basic lt'ichotomy of nature sounds. human sounds. and electric Ol' rnechanical sounds (Shafer 1969). Namre sounds are defincd as Jhe mos1 plcasing, mec.hanwal sounds as thc m ost annoymg (Schafc r 1970). A more dctailcd analysis d is tinguishc.o;: bcl\'t.rccn acoustics. psychoacmLo;:tics, mcaning, and acsthctic quaJitics (Schafer 1994). The soundscape as a who le is always part o f the process. Sound objects, detnched Jrom tbe sunounding acoustic environment, lose meaning. Afte.r being rocorded. sound can no longer reHect all quali1ies and Jhus fails Jo describe a soundscapecompleJely. Sonography. Jhe "att of soundscape nolalion. is lim iJed (Truax 1978: n.p.).

Dcpcndmg o n rcscarch focus, most rcccnt stud ics use o nly somc o f thc quaJitics introduccd by Schnfcr. Gavcr highlights hcarablc fcaturcs of a sound event with his cl nssHication o f vibrating solids, aerodynamic events. and liquid solids ( 199>). Boh Servigne et al and Lebiedowskn prede1enn ine cet1ain sounds as noise. when they focus on traffic. road works. factories. people (Servigne et ni. 1 999). background noise, mechanica1 equipment. Bnunan activities,


no ises of oature, human prese.nce. and spee.ch a nd communicalion (Lebiedowska 2005) Anthropophony. biophony. and geophony (Papadimitriou et aL 2009) replace the basic trichotomy of nature. human. and mechanical sounds. lnlen.sity of :;ound event i:; al:;o Lnwgnl.led lnto the analysis.

Schicwe mlC.l Komfdd h1ghhght subJcclivc cvaluahon as a b:1se for aural pc rccption. [n addition to acoustic and psychoacoustic qua litics o f a sound cvcnt, individual perception is also considered (2009). That such cl assHication does not have lo rely on empirical field work is shown in lbe works of Yu and Kang, wbo add instrumental sounds lo Schafer's lhree basic categories when considering lhe audibility of single sow1ds (20 1 0). Also. working with prerecorded sound srunples. Rychtnkov::l and Vc:nn.e1r clussil)' sound according 10 aoo\l::;tic a nd psychoacou.s tic fcaturcs (20 13). Ovcra11, thc c lassillca tion of sound cvcnts always dcpcnds on scicn lit1c contcxt and thc a im of thc study.

3.3. 1 AcousFic Ecolojzy S C/(Jssificmion

With listcning. soundwalking. and sound descriptions. World Soundscape Projoct approached tho study of the soundscapo in the late 1 %Os and early 1970s. /\11 findmgs had lo be rccordcd and classificd lo place thcm in lhc contcxt of lhc entirety o f sounds. '"The question is , which type.s o f notation will be m os( helpful in lhese pursuits? Al present there c an be no grand solutions to thi s proble m, for research is only beginning" (Schafer 1994: 13 1). According to the Project . sonography itself might be a form of classification. depending on the approach to "register the geographi


Revolutioo, mechanical sounds dro\vned oul both human and natural sounds wi1h 1beir ubiquilous buzz and whirr" (Schafer 1969 6) Onoma1opoeic words like buzz and wlmT are relalively neutral desc.riptions for unnatural souods and do not poim toa clas:;ification. while the category of mechamcal souuds already 1S one. BdOn: Schafcr descnbes ccrlam ways of classify ing ::;ound c vents he dctcm1incs lhrcc major sound catcgorics: naturc sounds, human sounds, and electric or mechanical sounds (Schafer 1969: 5-6}. This tlichotmny is oflen used in acous1ic ecologies and beyoud, while expJanalions are generally missing. From a social geographic perspeclive. classify ing sound based on i1s appearance Ol' perceplion is su iwble. especially in 1he conslruclivisl approacb of viability -

. . classificauons " prove adequate in the cont-:xts in which they wer-: created" (von Glascrsfcld 1995: 7).

Likc 11 tcchniques f unalysis, this t)nly be j ustilk-d if it lcads t thc impr

Sound ilr the City

.!:lccording lo lhcir physical (acouslics) o r lhc way in which lhey are pcrecived ac..-cording lo lheir function :md mc--nning (scmiotics and semnntics): or according to lhcir cmotjonal or affcctivc qualitics (acslhctics)(Schafcr 19')4: 133).

105

Physicnl charnclcristics can be rccordcd quantitativcJy, thcrcby rcducing thc impact o r individuality. Data like frequency and duration of a sound Cilll he measured objectively. A sound Shlt1S with the mtack, whi1e body describes the 1 ime during which lile sound exists unlil ils decay. A card for each sound is produced 1hat d isplays all characteristics. which can be analyzed laler. Psychoacoustic ntforrmtllon adds to the acoustic infonnaion. about basic condjuons dunng rccording. possiblc fluctuations of thc sound. cxtcmaJ mtcrfcrenccs likc wind thal might inllucncc thc origlinnl sound, are a lso namcd on thc card (Schafer 1994: 1>6).

While ac.oustic characte risl ics are conside.re.d object ive data . .. no souo d has objective meaning. and the observer will have specific cultural altitudes toward 1he Sllbjecr (Schafer 1994 . 137). Semiolics and sernantics can change. which makes it

106 Geogrophies of Urban Sound

The ascription and meaning of sound are al way s dependen! on its context. Without it, sound events degenerare into meaningless sound objects. After a sound is recorded, it loses its embedment in the whole soundscape, with all its connolalions and intenelations. From Schafer 's point of view, context is highly important and has to be taken into account in order for researchers to learn more about environmental sounds. Sound is more than its frequency, decibels, and amplitude modulation.

3.3. 2 Other Possibilities ro Classify Sound

Starting with thc classification systcm of Schafcr and thc World Soundscapc Project, many authors have developed a slightly different way of categorizing sounds. The research focus is always the detenn ining factor. For Gaver, sound sources are mosl importan! lo explore. He assumes that "[e)ach source of sound involvcs an intcraction of matcrials" (Gavcr 1993: 4). Whcn two objccts touch each other, like wheels running on asphalt, the contact causes a sOLmd. All those sounds can be experienced by the listener - that is why Gaver asks, "What do we hear" ( 1993). Hearing a sound at the same time means that emprica! data can be recorded for furthcr analysis.

VVe can hear an approaching automobil e, its si7.e and speed. \Ve can hear where it is. and how fasl it is approaching. And wc can hcar Lhc narrow. cchoing walls of the alley it's driving along. These are lhe phenomena of concern loan ecological approach lo perceplion (Gaver 1993: 5).

To categorize these sounds Gaver introduces tJuee different categories: vibrating solids, aerodynamic events, and liquid solids. Examples for the first would be a door closing or walking of shoes. The second category includes sounds "caused by the direcl introduction and modification of almospheric presswe differences from some source. The simples! aerodynamic sound is exemplified by an exploding balloon" (Gaver 1993: 8). The third categoty covers sounds caused by an object falling into thc water or any othcr liquid . "[D]ripping and splashing" are givcn examples (Gaver 1993: 9). Additionallevels of classi lication include the "nature of the material", its configuration, and "acc.ording to whether they belong to the causal interaction" (Gaver 1993: 10).

Servignc et al. isolate a ecrtain type of sounds that already is a classification in itself: noise. As discussed earlier (see 2. 1) there are various sources for noise. The authors identify four categories that are based on the sound source: "Noises are caused by traffic, road works, factories, and also by people" (1999: 262). A similar focus on noisc comes from Lebiedowska (2005). Like in Servigne et al. , a detailed definition for noise is missing (various approaches are discussed in 4.2). The classification in the study is based on the intensity of noise in urbanized areas. Decibel measurements are conducted to la ter categorize locations from vety quiet areas to very loud ones. Traffic noise is excluded from the soundscape and


investigated in detail (Lebiedowska 2005: 342). lntensity can also be combined with an approach evocative of the studies of the World Soundscape Project. Human activities, sounds "produced by living organisms", and those of nature are explored by Papadimilriou el al. (2009: 129). Technology or mechanical sounds are missing in this description, and the differentiation between the second and the tlrd categoty is not always clear to define. The sound caused by wind belongs to the "natural elements" category, but the mstling of leaves in the wind could be ascribed lo lhe lree as a living organism. On the second classification leve) intensity is "scored in a tluee-level scale ranging from one (less intense sound) to tluee (more intense sound)" (Papadimitriou et al. 2009: 129). Like Lebiedowska, forcground and background sounds are scparatcd from cach othcr. Thcrcby, thc group of background sounds differs from foreground sounds only because of its distance from the recording si te:

[T)he foreground sounds refer to those produced instantaneously and sharply near the sampling site (e.g. birds, insects) while the background sounds refer to those produced far away from the sampling site and originate from the whole surrounding landsc.1pe (e.g. traille noise, long distance sound sea waves) (Papadimitriou et al. 2009: 129).

A second reason to differenliate between foreground and background sounds is the difference between those being produced "instantaneously and sharply" and !hose originating "from the whole sutTounding landscape" (Papadimitriou et al. 2009: 129). One crucial factor is the distance from the record ing device. Al another recording sile, lraffic sound thal is indefinable mosl of the li me is deconstructed into souud events from certain car engines, homs of busses, and whee1s of motorbikes.

Schiewe and Koneld (2009) focus 1ess on the position and more on the acoustic and psychoacouslic quali lies of a sound source. Subjective eva1uation - aside from the unique location where sound is experienced - is tied to socialmeaning and tbe individual stream of consciousness is the basis for the classification. Dctcrmining factors includc "tcchnical acoustic variables such as sound pressure, frequency, time llow and sow1d propagalion, direclion md dislance" (Schiewe and Komfeld 2009: 1 ). In their sound-mapping catalogue (described in 3.2.2) various interdisciplinary classifications are used to categorize differeut c1cmcnts. Gcographic indicators dcriving from urban gcography or c1imato1ogy are considered, as are those from soundscape research 1ike lo-ti and hi-fi (see Weslerkamp 1988: 6). Acoustics tell researchers about decibels, velocily, and intensity, while psychoacoustics inform them about loudness, pitch, and rhythm (Schicwe and Komfe1d 2009: 3).

Sound c1assification does not require fieldwork. Some of the most recent studies use sound samples to fi nd out more aboul lhe soundscape and listeners' preferences. Yu and Kaug adopt Schafer 's trichotorny of natural sounds, human sounds, and me.cbatcal sounds and add instnnnenta1 sounds as a fourtb categoty

108 Geogrophie:i of Urbau Som1d

(Yu and K ang 201 O: 625). In addit ion Lo this classification, the presence or sounds is tested in audio recordings played back to a group of respondents in a laboratory expel'iment In corllt'ast to field studies. certain sounds - e g . trntlic and birds. Ot' a fountain and con:-;tn1ction :-;ounds - are combmed and sirnullaneously played back. Thc fom1cr dircctivc to aJway::; mclude thc acoustu; cnvironmcnt of a sound cvcnt into its classitication and analysis is rcplaccd by a focus o n acouslic and psychoacoust ic, even aesthetic, qualities. Me.aning is less importan!, as the study of Rychtrikov aud Verme ir shows.

catcgorics cstablishcd as a resuh of no a\ltomatic clustcring algorithm basc.d on multipammctcr analysis by 13 acoustical paramctcrs uscd as mensures. on a lafge set of'sound tecordulgs (20 13: 240).

Bul semiotics and semantics are important features that are needed lo fully undersland 1he soundscapes impact on the listener.

3.4 Empirical SCullies in Lisbon , London , and AusHn

Sound fieldwork can be conducted using a valiety o f approaches. As the stud ies descrlbed above have shown. method is highly dependent on scientific discipline and the study The present research seeks access to soundscape studies by using some of the Jnethods described above and by otl'ering some new techniques to approach mban sound. The most basic requirement is to record the soundscape. For thaf purpose. SchaJCr's tnchotomy catcgorizauon - kcynote, signals. and soundmarks- was llrst tcstcd in a fleld study m Lisbon, Portugal During a thn.-c-day pe riod. the soundscape was recorded in soundwalks as suggested by \Vesterkamp (1974), following the crentive approach by Werner (2006). A focus on souod events and the extension of fieldwork using a standardized questionnaire made it possible to leai'Jl about the deconstl'llction and classification of the soundscape.

The recording of sound events wa:; pan of a subsequent st11dy in London, England. Thc numbcr of rcscarch si fes was extended (from ninc in L isbon to 12), and sound classiflcation stat1ed with anothcr approach from thc \Vorld Soundscapc Project. The classification of sound events as nature, human, or teehno logy sounds made possible a vital discussion on the individual impacl on souodsc.ape fieldwork. It was detennined that the perception of the researcher might collide with established classification concepts. f or the sndy. the sound of lea ves on a trec ' va:; cJas:;ified asan inanimatc nature :;ound, a conccpt most blOiogi:;t:; might find o trcnstvc. Jn the contcxl of human pcrception ;.md (he impact of sound on the urban dweller a more detailcd c lassification systcm \Vas dcvclopcd . Al thc completion o f the study, a quest ion ahout typical sounds for ce11ain a reas or locations arose. leading to o third field study, conducted in Austin, Texas

The Aus1in study was aimed al finding a way to describe the soundscape of a specific area. distict. or quarter of a city. What are the most typical sounds at a


ce11ain local ion? Tbe grouodwork laid by the Lisbon and Loodon s1udies helped lo develop a method lo answer this question Soundwalks were a valuable me1hod for an area. Additional recordings and photographic documentalion 1nsigh1s inlo o f a predefined area. Al five rescarch sitcs. from the dense cily ccntcr lo quict urban spacc.s. daw was gathcrcd fo r sound poiut recorrling. This ncw tcchniquc o lr.::rs n \vay to describe the soundscnpe in detail. \Vith the results or the Austin study, vnlious research questions could be genernted nnd nn empirical fundament was estnblished from whjch to proceed with the social geogJaphic research Frojects described in

4 .

3 . ././ Deconstructing the Sormdscape - Lisbon

In the 1994 Gem1an movie l..isbon Str:ny. Phillip Winter, n ;;ound recordi st, tries to help out his friend Friedricb Monroe, who is filming n documental)' in the Portuguese capital. Because Monroe has vanished by the time Winter arrives. the recordis\ the slreets ofLisbon lo randomly >!lmple sotl:ld events for the lefl-behind s1lent movic clips. Thc result of thc more or less ai.11lc.ss soundwalk are rccordmgs Wcmcr dc.scribc.s in his " Soundcapc-Dwlog:

Trmn , bird::i, riv::r - thcsc a re lhc maj or sound !:ilrcams u li !ilc-ning. Oiincur in Lisbon cxpcicn::.cs. And the 1rn1Tic, the 1rntnc thal shall cnd (2006: lOS, lransiJlcd from Gcrman).

According to the World Soundscapc PrOJCCl, walkmg around and listcnmg l sound is no aimlcs:; prncticc. \Vcmcr - likc Wintcr in thc movic - approachc.s Lisbon 's soundscape by sound\\:aJking. ''A soundwaJk is excursion whose main purpose is Jistening to the environment. lt is exposing our ears to every souod aro\lnd u.s no malleJ where wc are" (Westerkamp 1974: n.p.:1. \Vemer extcnds lhe method by adding percep1ion 10 the crite,ia. he ca lis the !\letaSou of Lisbon is "ex:perienood. perceived sound, that include.s ever)'thing hearablc, both real and imaginary. Thc sound.scapc, not how it i.s, bu( how it is pcrccivcd. MctaSon suggcsts n mcthod o r listcning ror urban cnvironmcnts" (2006: JI 0).

In my own study in Lisbon, 1 tested the soundwalk as a method for urbnn geographic sound research. As shown above. tlescnbing is one basic tedudque for the Wol'ld Soundscape Project. Thus. starting witb a desc.ription of 1he Lisbon sound.scapc secms to be adcquatc. In thc first phase. a group o f 18 students were askcd to walk thc c1ty of Lisbon and pcrlbnn a sotmdwa)k. To !ldd to thcir individual dcscti ptions, audio rccordings o r thc \valks wcrc madc. /\s in Schnfcr's cmpiric.al stud1es ( 1 YY4 ). the :a111C1patmg researchers were sens1l1Zed E.lr l1stenmg and usmg me1hods of ncous1ic ecology In pairs the s1uden1s wnlked dif!"eren1 pnrts of Lisbon for thl'ee 10 l'our hours to about the local soundscape. Baixa. 1he city centel', and close-by quarters like Alfama and Chiado were iovestigated.


IJeavy traffic aod a high numher of pedestrians dominated the descriptions, and some of the typical sounds depicted by Wemer (2006)- especially the traditional tram - were named. research group nol only recorded their soundwalk but took picmre.s of dominanl :;ound source:;. like canaries m the Alfama, (;dking peoplc in thc and the tr:m1 in v!mus other loc:HlOm. A dcscription of .a rcprcscntativc soundwalk notes:

Wc: slarl our soundwulk nl a lilllc purk North of Run Altandega nnd Rua Arnmeiros. Somc pcople walk by. cating. Others sil outsidc the and

lunch. Som; pcoplc talk. 1 cnn hcar thc sound of shocs pnssing by. Thcy wnlk rather fast. probably on thcir way l.xlck to thc Ba1xa at1cr lunchbreak. There 1S some ttatTic Ol\ Ru.'l. Alflindega. Mostly pass by. some wms. some trucks. A grou> uf tourists st

Sound ilr the City

Limociro and Rua de S.iio Tom. Trams pas:: by cvcry two minutes aml1he SQund


Figure 3.2 Lisbon - Sound Cloud

dominant kind of music mentioned (92 percent). Overall, Fado, the tram, and talking people were described the most significan! sounds for Lisbon. The results of the questionnaire were considered for the third phase of the emprica! study.

In phase three, 1e inner city of Lisbon was divided into nine research areas to ensure a maximum number of different souod environmeuts for the recording (see Figure 3.2). The recording sites were not set accordiug to a gtid but rather based on the geographical appearance of relevant sound events. Over a period of three days 560 sow1d events were collected. Whenever muhiple recordings of the site were taken, only a representative sample was documented. Recordiogs with poor sound quality were taken out of the study. Similar to Schafer's studies, thc dates and times of thc rccordings wcrc notcd, as wcll as thc typc of audio recorder, place of recording, md distance from source. The track number of the stereo record ings was mentioned to link tbe notes back to the original sound files. Special observatious and condilious during recording were also registered. Due to gcncralizaton and cvaluaton, 289 samplcs rcmaincd for furthcr analysis. Thc final set of sound events gave an impression of the variety of sounds of Lisbon. Beca use of earlier soundwalks and the questionnaire, a representative sound profi le could be gathered. The aun of the study was not to use the recordings lo compose au artificial souudscape likc the World Soundscapc Projcct would havc done, but to leam about sound in the urban environment and its possible deconstruction, as well as lo discuss the impact of individual experiences for both respondents aud researchers.


3.4.2 Calegorizing Single Sound Events - London

Acoustics and psychoacoustics, semiotics and aesthetics: There are severa! ways to classify !he sounds of a soundscape (see Schafer 1994). As Lhe Lisbon sludy shows, recording of sound events becomes difficult when individual or social meaning is ascribed to it. Categories like the soundmark caJUlOI be identified without local knowledge or considering individual preferences. To learn about the urban soundscape aeslhetic connotalion mighl no! be U1e mosl promising means for a fi rst classification. Acoustic and psychoacoustic descriptions seem to be a better starting point if the overall airo is to first get a better understanding of which sounds exist within llic urban landscapc bcforc possiblc cffccts can be discusscd (scc Chaptcr 2).

A second field study in London, England, started by separaling nature, human, and techno logy souuds. After pretesting, music as a fourth catego1y - which had been helpful in Lisbon - was taken out of the categorizatiou system, and corrcsponding sounds split bctwccn human sound (c.g., singing) and tcchnology sound (e.g., stringed instruments tmd drums). Researchers focused llieir attention on sound evenls thal could be listened to separately, withoul interference from the surrounding soundscape. To deconstruct the soundscape even further, the tluee catcgories werc complemcnted with additional qualities.

lluman sound, verbal: Talk ing, shouting, and singing were included in this catego1y. Sound samples lik.e pedestrians talking and newspapermen selling journals were recorded. Also representative were announcements coming from loudspeakers in the subway and any conversa! ion on a mobile phone.

Human sound, non-verbal: Sound caused by U1e human body excepl any ki.nd of speech. Rhytlunic hand clapping while listening to live music and packi.ng up produce on tbe fanner 's market by tbe vendors fell into this category. Footsteps on a sta ircase and eating roasted almonds at the Thames river were addiliona l examples.

Nature sound, animate: All animals belonged to this category. A horse of tbe Mounted Brancl1, London 's mounted poli ce, was one example, as well as ducks swimming on a pond in Hydc Park, a dog barking in thc strccts of Wapping, and doves sitting on the streel lights in Tower HilL

Nature sound, inanimate: Wind, water, and fi re were the most typical sounds representing inanimate nature. ln combiuation with trees, wind blowing through !caves recordcd in Stamford was also countcd as inanimatc. A small waterfall in Hyde Park and sewage water at the London Docks were other examples.

Technology sound: Technology sounds were not subdivided. Any mechanical, electronic, and technological source was included in this category. Recorded and li ve music - except singing - also fell into this categmy. Examples documente


from a CD pi ayer ll front of a store in Notting lli 11, and the buzz of a power socket near London Bridge Two additional qualities were attributed to each sound event. regardless of whether they were nature, hmnan. or technology SOllnd:

Moving/nol moving sound: Thc Lisbon sludy showcd lhat many recorded sounds are caused by moving sources. and that it's valuable to differe.nl iate bet\veen those sou nds and the ones caused by objects that are not moving. A taxi drivlng over a speed bump ne-ar Covent Garden. a stroller rolling over tbe sidewalk in Ganick Street. and a st:agull flyin.g over tht: {rt:es in Hyde Park were examples of moving sounds. Staon:u-y sounds documcnlcd includcd a car cnginc slartmg m a parking sp

M"jor ro.sd

0

Hammer smlth & fulham

(0\'@Rt

8iiton

Camden

Wands-worth

t.ondon Btidge Holl

Wapl)ing

&

Sound iJ the City 117

on the ground), and 10 meters (about 32.3feet / hom of a car). Figure 3.3 gives an overview of the recording around London Bridge

Tecllllology sounds occured the most. followed by human and nature sounds. ::>verall, 287 sound events wen:: recorded and docmnemed. 49 percem o f the .)Ounds fcll into thc catcgory oftt:chnology. whtle a somewhat smaller amounl wcre .;.atcgorizcd as human sounds (43 pcrccnt). Thc numbcrs oC verbal and mman sounds bare1y d iffered (22 percenl lo 2 1 percent of the entire co11ection). !\nd perhaps a liu le surprising for an agglomeration like London, nature sounds fonned the smallest group. with animate and inanimate sounds each making up only 4 percem of tbe documented sounds.

The approach to deconstructing the :;oundscapc through the trichotomy Jl naturc, human, and tcchnolog.y sounds promotcd by Schafcr ( 1994) was valuablc for lhc ongoing study as sound rccording and classification has bccn :ested empilically. In the final d iscussion of the London study one rundame.ntally geographic queslion arose-that could no1 be answe-red using the existing methods of soundscape record in: What are the most usual sounds al a predefined location? What are lhe ty pical sounds for an area. (JUa.rter. or district in lhe city? 3.-1.3 Specific Sounds Jor Auslin

The Austin fieldwork buildson the outcomesof hoth studies in Lisbon and London. To find out more aboul lhe urban soundscape and Jbnnulale re levont research

five different research areas were detected (Figure 3.4). After exploring the cily in multiple soundwalks. the decision was made to

:-ecor

Zilker Par k

Rosedale

.,North Llniversity

3..4 Austio, TX - Restarcb Arcts

Z j 1 k e r Aunin Nelgl'lbofflood l ,OOOm

Sound iu the City 119

as an inilial way 10 learo more about lhe souodscape of p redefmed areas, but the Aus1in soundwalks were mo

122 Geographie:i of Urbau Sound

Slreet, San Jacinto Boulevard. and Se.venth Streel to Congress Avenue. whe.re it conlinued west on Sevenlh S1ree1 10 Colorado Street and then Sixth again. Alkr a shM detour entering Congress Avenue from 1he Soulh. the soundwalk conlinued on Six1h Streel and finally stopped 111 Bmzos Street. where recording startc

e .. 1 11 1 ---Q) RKO

124 Geogrophie:i ( Urbau Sound

these d ifferent soundscape eleme.nls. At the westen1 border, Guadalupe Street is dominated by tecllnology sounds. while on the east si de - e lose to the university tower- Jnostly human sounds are heard Nat\lre sounds occur aH ruound the ruea and e:;ptcially be :;poned near waJkways where no cars allowed. From 24th Strect, wcre vehtcles can en ter thc campus and thc Dc,;partmcnt of Gcography ami thc Environmcnl is thc arca c.xtcnds southward lo 22nd Strcct.

The soundwalk started at the west of the univers ity tower and followed lnner Campus Orive 10 24th Street T l).:' route tumed right and turned back to Inner Campus Orive al Mary E. Gearing Hall. Upstairs and over a small patllway the route c:onlinued atound the univei'Si()' tower to tbe pedestl'ian area that leads directly to Guadalupe S treet. whert! tht! soundwalk ended. r ht! loudest sound wa:; ICl'UHJcc.) VIl .. a iu fi VIIl u f l ile lu\\Ct , W I.CJC :stutlcnhi iJIU)'Ctl IIIUM\,; U\'\;1 mulliplc 1oudspcakcrs (68.2 dB(J\)). Thc palhway casi ol' thc towcr was thc mosl quiet aren (52.4 dB(A)). Human sounds were most with people walldng, 1 alking to e.ach other, and having celJ phcne conversntions. Al so common we.re the sounds ofbirds and lea ves in the trees. bu: also cars e lose to Guadalupe and nmning air conditioning a ll over the dcfined area. For sound point recording a s1te on 24th Street W:; chOSt!n, a:; ll rdevant :;ound:; could be found therc. The sound of pcoplc was by far thc mosl dominan! onc in thc rcscarch arca (69.83 percent). Bird sounds followed in second place with 55 percenl, and lalking cQvered 26.26 percent of the sound PQiot recording's time. The presence of two human sounds within the top tluee indicaes the overnll dominance of this category. Allhough 1 O different technology souncs were recorded in contrast to only five human sounds. the laners 48. 12 perceut of the soundscape more than doubled lechnologys 22.2 1 perccnt. E ven nature sounds occum:d more often, 29.17 percent. 1\ Jook al thc thrcc mosl dominanl sounds in rcscarch arca two nol only indJCatcs lhe dominance of human sounds, but ccmbined \Vith visual observations during sound point recording also raises an in te resting question. \l.Jhile almost 70 percent of the time walking people were recorded. only around 30 percenl of the time did talking oocur. Given the tbat not only moving (i.e. walking) people lalk. bul also student:; situng along campus roads and palhways. mny of lhe walkcrs wen: stlent. Adding cdl phonc conversalions (about 9 pe rccnt) stlll lcft a high numbcr of notlalking bul walking pcoplc. many of thosc wcaring earphones. h cannot be said whelher audio contenl was heing played hack over those elll)hones at those times. but it can be assumed thal most s tudents we.ar those devices only while listening to audio content of some kind The creation of an individual soundscape has already been described in section 2.5. ami Chaptt!r 5 wJII lakc on tht! issue with a media geograpluc (hscussion on sound. Asidc fro m hstcning to podcast::. and music, carphoncs can a lso be uscd lo listen lo audio-guidcd tours, likc lhc Audio Tour for Works of Pub/ic Arl produced by Landmarks (n.d.), thal comp lements puhlic arl installat ions on the university campus. Chapter 4. section 4.4 \Vill d iscuss the issue ofaudio guides in detail.


Research dll!tt 3: /nterst(lle 35 The se.cond are a on campus was chosen beca use it conla ined the sounds caused by lmffic on major roads. highways. and inteJ'stales, Thus. lnteJ'state 35 is less cubic than the four o ther research areas. H follows Dean Ke

on .., " - -... " -1!

,:; .S

, '1!'

.:.; a i 1

" ...

i :;_,

< .e :

l'< " " " 0:: 1 >


the Colorado River Lo fo llow tbe creek upstream. Before the trail crossed Bm1oo Springs Road the route tumed right to cross Banon Creek over a footbridge On the other side. the soundwalk continued downstream bel:ween the creek and one of Zilker Park, major oplrti. ll then rao alongide the track of the Zilker Zcphyr Mintturc Train. The soundv .. aJk cndcd :1t Lo u NcJT Pomt on the north\\'Csl sidc o f thc crcck s mouth. Thc Joudcst s i te on thc soundwalk wns: thc cnding poinl al Lo u Neff Poi ni (56 dB(A)). The quietes! sil e was on lhe northwesl si de o f the creek (49.9 dB(A)). Tbe resenrch nrea was a homogeneous one in terms of sound leve]. with a relatively smaiJ variation of volmne (onJy around six decibels) among the 16 measurements si tes of the soundwalk . .Toggers. walkers. and cyclists could be heard m almost every :;pot on of the soundwalk, Wh1le thl.."! area around Toomey Road and BarlOn Springs Road was partly dominatOO by thc tcchnology sounc.ls of lrafflc. Sound poinl rccording wns conduclcd in lhc middlc o f thc soulhcasl bank ofBmion Creek, on the hike-and-hike trail . B ird sounds occurred the most in recordings (37.36 percenl), fo llowed by the two humnn sounds of wnlking (1 5.44 percenl). and jogging (14 .69 percent). With talking in fourth place. human sounds constiruted the majority of thc soundscape (36.88 percenl). c losely fo llowed by n:.lture sounds (36. l 2 percent). sounds accounted for 23.05 pe rcent oC thc soundscapc at Barton Crcck. Thc rclativc balance of sounds al so showcd m the d ifferent sounds recorded, with tOur nature, five human, and seven techno logy sounds. ln all other research areas - even in llyde Park - tech.nology sounds exceeded al1 human and nature sounds combined, and sometimes eveu more than doubled them.

Against the rnlher quiet soundsca(X: of Cree k. tempora1y sound events stuck l!l lhat could nol adequatcly be d iplayed by pcrccnt of the soundscapc. 1.08 pc rccnl of thc time a plnnc or hclicoptcr could be hcard. Sounds of airplancs (lying over an area can ha ve a huge e ffect on the 1 istene r and impact the soundsc-ape significantly due lo individual perception and subjective connotation. A field study ln th e R1line.-Main-Area in Germany inveSI igates lhe isst1e, using the example of air traffic sound caused by Frankfurt Airport (section 4 2 3).

All rescarch are as repreent a larger part o f Auslin and posess an individual and charm;tcn.stic soundscapc. \Vith sound pomt rccording it is possiblc to documcnt Lhc typical soundscapc o f an arca (scc Figure 3.5) . Thus, cach sound po int produces relevant data for the soundscape of the entire cily. Sti11, sound po in l recordin g can never display how a c ity sounds, i.e . what a ty pical .. souod of Auslin" would be Sound point recording should mther be used to generate reseMch questions based on a new sensicization regarding urban sound. Based on tht! five Austm rc::;earch mca:;. the following i:;sues :;tand out :

How imp011ant is a c ity brand Ji k e Aust in s " U ve Music Capitol o r thc World" for lhe local population? llow does sound in med ia a1l'ecl the percept ion of everyday life?

What impact do trame sounds llave on the organization of a c ity and the quality o f life of its inhabitants?


\Vhal parl does si leoce play in lhe urbao soundscape . and wbat differe.nl qualities can it have (so tbal certain types, like sacred silence. might be expel'ienced)? How does air traffic sound afl"'ect the residents living in the enu'Y lane of global a1rports'!

These ::md more questions will be discussed in the next chapter, which '"ill focus on lhe various uses of sound in the c ity.

3.1.2 Keynote, Signal, Soundmark1. The Keynote2. The Signal3. The Soundmark3.3 Classifying Sountls in Different Ways3.3.1 Acoustic Ecology` s Classification

sound in the city

Documents