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
U oion Road

Fnrnh.1m

Ashgate Publishing Compo'lny

l lO Cherry Strect
Suite J. J
Burlinglon. VT 0540 1-381 8
USA

SuiTey. GU9 7PT

England

British Liba ry
in P ubliclltio n Olltll
A catalog ue r.cord f(')r this book is a wtilable from thc Rritish 1,ibrat) '
Thc Lihnuy o f Congrc!'!' lms cat:.tlugcd lbe pdntcd cdition

ti$

fulluw!':

Wissmaon. Torstetl.
Geographies o f 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 noiscUnited 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.ES5W5 7 20 14

363. 74' J-dc23

20 D 0455 10
ISBN 9781409462194 (hbk)
ISAN 9 78 1409462200 (cbk - PDF)
ISBN 9781472407702 (cbk cf>UB)

Prinlcd in thc Unitcd Kingdom by Hcnry Litg Limitcd.

a.t thc Dorsct Prcss. Dorchcstcr. DTI JI-ID

Contents

List ojFiJtmT!s

vii
ix

List ojTables
Abouttlre Author
Ad..?1owledgeme111s

XI

xiii

Listen Up!
1

Tboughts on Sound ami the

1.1 Individual Perc.eption as Basic Requirement

Sense of Place: Coucepl and Multidisciplinary Theoetical

1.2

1.3

26

1.4

Soun.d in the l-lumanilies

36

Sound Effec ts
2 1 Various Effects o f' &wnd oo !he JJrban Dwfller
2 2 lJnw,.1n1i:d Souncl s

2.3
2.4

Wantcd Sounds
Thc /\bscncc of Sound
The [ndividual Soundscape

17

Approachcs
Googrophicol Studics on Scnsc of Place and Sound

,1.5

ti
5.2

62
69
75

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

J1l2

3.4

1.08

Empincal Studics in Lisbon. London. and Auslin

U.<es of Sound in tbe Cit''

4. 1 Managing Sound in the Urban Enviromnelll
4.2 Noise Perceplion vs. Noise in Urban Planning
4.3 l:lrimding a C1t)' Through Sound
4.4 Touristtc Potcntials o f Sound
4.5

Sacred Silcncc
T he l\1edial Crc;\tion of tbc Cit)' in Au dio Drama

81
81

ill
ill

1.3.8
153
172
188

203

5. 1 Sound in Meia

203

5.2 Audio Drama- The Tltree /nvesligators vs. Gabriel Burus

20LI

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 o f 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 e nvironme nta l musi (Truax

1996: S 1).

The study of environmental mu 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. "Anytlu ng 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 because of ils various etfecls on the utban dweller (see
Chapter 2). but a lso from a hl.:,1orical point o f v1ew:
Oig noises Jike c.annons, church bells, steam engines and j ets 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"
fou nd 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<r (Bull and Bnck 2003: 38). especially if they derive

Geographie:i o[ Urbau Sound

114

fro m 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 diroolive of lhe World Soundseape Project. "which wa
at Snnon Fm::;cr Umvcrsity in Brius h 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.c orded 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"
(lvlc<.:arlnoy 2000: n.p.) a now re:>earch 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( framewo rk, 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
in acoustic ecology and
book has had 1he most impact on all follow-up
neighboring d isciplines Truax describes Schafer 's worJ..: as .. a largely descriptive
basis for soundscape stu<lies" ( 1996 53) lhat is slill up to date in many respecls

(see sections 3.2 and 3.3).

Onc assumpllOn of

ccolo,gy is that lt is ..
lo takc thc acoustic
cnvironmcnt for grantcd in daiJy lifc .. (Pctcrson 1996: 400). /\nothcr onc is that
"environmental sound acquires its meaning both in tem1sor its own prope11ie-s and
in1em1s of ils relalioo lo contexl" (T'""' 1996: 52). Tbe last slatemenl indicales
the dependence of sing1e sound events on the seuing in which they emerge (see
seclion 3 1.2). bul ahnost hides lhe individual elemenl lhal is necessal)' for any
meanmg. "Environmental ound i doooded by lhe litilenel' (Tnax 1996: 52). All
cnvironmcntal sounds combmcd are dcscnbcd as thc soundscapt:, which Truax

defines by its communicativc quality: "1 usoo thc tcrm 'soundscapc [... ] nol
j usi as a synonym ror 'acoustic environment', but as a basic term o r acoustic
communicalion. 11 refen; tio how the individua) and society ns l whole understaod
lhe acouslic environment lhrough lislening" (Tnax 200 1: xviii). A more open
comes from Schafel'. who explicitly includes media environments in
addition to natural ones:
The soundscape is any <cou.stic fie.Jd o l' stud>' We tnfl>' speok of a musical
compo::;ilion as a

()r a wdi() prog.ram as u sc)untlscape o r nn aco uslic

cnvironm cnl :1s 11 soundscapc. Wc c:t n isol:tlc an

of study jusi

1994: 7).

cnvironmcnt
11 fidd
wc can sludy thc charactcristics of givcn lnndscapc (Sch.1li:r

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 si mply 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. l ntemational radio stations - that use music lo transport images and
imaginations (see Bu ll 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 ofUrban Sound

3.1.1 Soundscape, Composition, Sound Events

At the place where a sound emerges the physical surroundings have to be
investigaled. Every buildin g, 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 inlo 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-e s,

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

Sound in the City

87

rhythms occur or a multitude of signi ficanl sound signals are str ung 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 S<)UI'CC miltCI'ial l.. ) ( b) lht lislncr'S knOwJedg Of th nVi r()nmental a nd
l'!)yc.hologic-al conlcxl of lhe
material
inYo ked :md enco urng.ed
[.. ] (e) thc comJ>Oser'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'ut ure. 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<.l soun d is out of cont..-!Xl but by rcfercncing. ils surrounc.ling

sounds it can cstablish n link back lo 1ts origin (scc SchafCr 1969: 44,
1996:
1).
The natural as well as the composed soundscape feature numerous sounds
that are mixed. lin ked. and interwoven in various ways u sinsJe sounds can be
identified easily by the listener. and background sounds do not disl1lrb single
di:;tinctive acous1tc S1gnals. he enviromnent i:; described .as hi -fi. "A hi-fi
cnvironmcnt is onc of acoustic clarity, \\' lh a favourablc stgnal-to-noisc rallo"
(Wcslcrkamp 19&8: 6). Sound can be c xpcricnccd c lcarly a nd is nol cloudcd or
masked by diffuse noise (see Schafer 1994: 272). Generally, urhan sound is not
classified as being hi-fi. A mucil higher qualily is ascribcd lo na.ture or wildemess
(Schafer 1994: 4:>. Weslerkamp 1988 7)

so-s

Thc quict ambiancc of thc hifi soundscape allows thc hstcncr 10 hcar ibrlhcr
into the d1stan:.ce j ustas the countt)'Stde exeteises long-range \'ie,ving. nle city
abbreviates this facility 101' distant hearing ( ... ) (S<:.hal'i': 1994: 43).

In comrast 10 a hi fi envlromnent sounds can be "overcrowded, resulling in

[ ... ]lack of clarily" (Schafer 1994: 272). The lo-fi environmem is ol\en Jinked

to electroacoustic sounds of the city. Tndc noise. electronic devices. and

HH

Geogrophie:i of Urbau Som1d

loudspe akers add to a cacophooy that e ar)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<.ls have tto be n::vcalcd ami
corrclatcd lo thcir sourccs and physical o1igins. " Single sound s will be studlcd
more attentively w ith attention paid to the fom1ants of the ir ove11one spectra and

10 lheir onse1and decay cbaracleristics" (Schafer 1969: 3). Truax defines a single
sound or Jound event as follows: ..A sound or sound sequence in its spatial and
temporal context as pan of a SOUNDSCAPE" (Tnax 1978. n.. p.). Sowul evenls
belong to thc natural environment wh1le .sound obects represcnt the rccorded fomL
or a ingle sound. " [Tjhc laUcr is an abslracl aCOUtilical objccl for sludy [ .. ]"
(Scharcr 1994: 274). it is not linkcd a ny more lo thc natura l cnvironmcnt with all
its connotations and meaning (see Truax 1978: n.p.). Schafer describes lhe sound
object as baving a pure acoustic exiSience, withoul the possibility fbr the listene.r

to establish links or interprel il (Schafer 1994 53). Single sound evenls have this
potential to connect the listener to the enviromnent. "They may be singled out for
auenllon if the
should arise, but nom1lly they aren., spt.:cifically nohced''
(Truax 200 1: 25). This mcans that thc dcfmtlion o f whal a single sound c vcnl
is, is basic-ally u> 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 i mpo11ant the listener migbt not consider the sound meaningful enough to pe rceive 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 a nd 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
foo tsteps 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 above. what the listcners hcars is detcnnined by

Sound in the City

89

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: 11is thc note that idcntilles thc key
or tonality of a particular composition" (Schafcr 1994: 9). In soundscapc
studies the keynote has a d ifl rent 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
wmd
moving
might think o f thc wavcs gcntly reaching thc
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 200 1: 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, a nd theref'ore expected and
prediclahle" (Truax 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 200 1: 139).
Kcynotc sound-; contain a soci.al c lcmcnt that makcs d ifflcult
empilical research. Derl ning sounds as parl of the keynote is ahrays
bnsed on socia l com1ota1ion and individua l 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 pe rccived by one
pc rson 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 200 1: 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

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 s pec irlc meaning, and it o lle n

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 signis by
thcir csscncc but contain both in di vi dual a nd soc1al mcaning. lf s1gnals
are distinctivc clcmcnts thnl cannot be ovcrhcard. Lht.y do not havc lo
be listened lo a utomatically. Aull a nd 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 200 1: 47). \ Vhat
aH signals have in common is their importance for the c ommunity. 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
are a. but not to hear a bikc bell on a bikc lanc. Onc would c xpcct 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 comm unity. 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 vis ual 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}' mbol. 11 has an cvcn
richcrconnolati on and mc:ming and might t:rigge r s trongcremotions in Lhc
liste ne r (Schafer 1994: 169). Signals o rhis to ric importance are singled 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

Sound in the City

91

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 a nd l wccling. Numcrous canary birds sit m
u ny cagcs
in thc opcn windows o f apa11m cnts :md fill 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 a nchoragc ,,,..ithm
the individual stream 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 listcner
seems to be a nccd m
many to preserve thc soundmarks by rccording and sto ring tbcm: 'Thc
soundmark, histo 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: 106). 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 c mbcddcd 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 notso-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

92

Geographies ofUrban Sound

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 record ings 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 ind ividual findings bccomc lcss importan!
in favor of the more and more pop ular 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 lcu lator 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 lculate noise levels. Guiclelines like !hose in lhe
Europea u Union belp to maintain the balance between cost and accuracy (Europeau
Commission Working GroupAssessment ofExposure to Noise (WG-AEN) 2006).
Standardizcd intcrvicws havc bccn uscd sincc thc carly soundscapc stud ics
of the World Soundscape Project. In questionnaires, researchers try to find out
about the individual experience of the soundscape and peop le'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 (Ra imbault and Oubois 2005), as well as passersby and users of specific locations (Kang 2007). Someti mes 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 Munay 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 ofthe most basic sound elements. "The first way is to cultiva te the habit 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: 115) 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 c ase 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: 75-6).
In order to increase 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 fintest soutld rnan can hear and othe sounds in the.
e nvironment (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 (hffcrcn t 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 inten sily"

(Scha fer 1970: 2). Two sounds of the same decihel level combined do not
the measured decibel leve! by three
double the loudness but rather
(Tntax 1978: n.p.).
There is another way of measuring sound tht is le.ss technologwal. Sch afer
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 ttu ough thc strccts makc onc tltink aboul shocs hittin g 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

95

Sound in the City

Tablc 3.1

_Decibel Compar i."on Cbart

Dishmct
(mlft)

(dB (A))

Airplanc
Fog horn
Li ve nlllsic conccrt
Ambulancc sircn

Disco
iPod (incor hcadphoncs)
Car horn
Lawnmowcr
Church bell

Bicyclc bcll
Motorbike
Barking dog
Tmffic
Bus
Tclcphonc

Spo11s ficld
COllVCI'SahOll

Dirds

Quiet park
Quiel room
Whisper
Leaves

130
130
120
110
110
109
100
100
<)5
95

100
1.000

328
3.280

10

o
o

<)O

7
1
500
1
100

85

20

so

5
15

75
75

75
60
60
55

40

--

o
JO o - 10
o - o

30

20

o
o

22
3

1.640
3
32g

65
16
50
9

o
100

32 -

o_
o
6

the sounds.:ape is pa11 of the World Soundscape Project "s practices. and Hildegard
We;:,1erka1np goes one step further by focusmg on her own relationship to sound:;:
The selrs interaction with the acoustic environrnenl becomes the focus oCstudy.
Sincc it is In)' inlcntion lO find ou1 about other pples rela tionships lO music!l::i-cnvironmcnt in n fut urc c11sc sludy, il secmcd mthcr cruc.i al lo use mysclf as a
c.1sc first (Wcslcrknmp 1988: 148)

are
in naJTative
abut theu mosl likl!d and
d islikcd sounds. thc most typtcal or untypical sounds, or lhc loudcsl a nd mosl qutcl
oncs. As w ilh parlicipant obsc.rvalion, thc rcsullo; are wrilt cn down and analyzcd
laler including c lassific al ion.
To record the soundscape with pen and paper ra1her an audio device Jeads to
the question ofhow sounds can be transfonned from an audio wave to visible text .

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 escribe d on papt r ora calhOdC- 11'1)'
thnl of phonctics, by whic h human spcech m uy be projc.ch:d a nd

musical nowtion. which pcrmi!s thc rcprcscntation of ccrtain souods

posscssing. ' musical iCaturcs (SchaiCr 1994: 123).
/\11 thrcc systcms are dc scriptivc and can display sound loan cxtc nt thal simply
talking about sound c annot cover. Rut notation is only applicahle for ce11ain

sounds. like single sound evenls ora collage of clearly idenlifiable sounds. Whil<
music - 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
ma
way. Aemll projection is one method tht! \Vorld S<rundscapc PrOJe<:l
uses. Mapp ing thc soundscapc wilh GIS software \1/as not :Ul option m lhc 19 70s.
Researchers collected sound data in the
recording sound sources or sound
heard in an are.a. The inte ns ity of sounris a nd il<s dist1i bution requires additional

tools like decibel measurement devices Thus, isobel contour maps c.an be created
(Schafer 1994: 131) The recunence of sotulds is delecled by counling and leads le
another c.arlographic display of sound. The final maps rue all based on dma Hlken
from the single souml e vcnts. which bccCm e sound ObJCCls whcn takcn o ut o fthcir
conlcxlual cnvironmcnl (scc 1994: 274, Tmax 1978: n .p.).
In the 1973 Vancouver Project reseJrchers used recorded audio mate Jial te
compose an m1istic version of the sou ndscape. As st aled above, from tbe 24 hour:\\'Orth of rec.ordlngs onJy one hoLlf W f! S finally u se-d for the- c.omposition T he <l\r.lic

fi les were ediled using a special lechnique:

ITiransparent editing tttld llltXing
ottginal reeo rdings. selected
fo r the.ir au.a l inte.rest and representaliveness of lhe soundscape in questton
(Trmt:o: 2002: 5).

The se-leclion of relevan t passages withi:l the recording was more important lhatl

enhancing the ac.oustic qua1ily of the rec) rding. Thus. a new. artificial soundsc-ape
1s creawd lhal 1s supposed 10 represent the e nvu onmt:nta l pe ndnl and ac.tivate
lislcncrs lo bccomt: more awarc of tht: sound that s urrm mds thcm. Aclivc
is promotcd using
can be rccognizcd cas ily. Thc rc.o;carchcr
bc c.o rnc.$ .-;o und d e.-;ig ne r o r :sound a rt i:st, ,.ho get.-; better in.-;ig ht.-; into e n v ironme ntnl
sounds while recomposing 1he soundscape. Because of the ind ividual characler of

soundscape composilion many piecesconlain programmatic messages. otkn rela1ed

10 lhe soundscape ilSCif and lopics like hearing or lislening (Wemer 2006. 135).

Sound in the City

97

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-a rcher s message:
fl\<l]y 0 \\'11 crcativc compositional work has. up to this po int. O<:cum:d almost
cxclusivcl)' in sound studios. On thc positivc sidc. thc studto cnvironmcnt has
ptovided me w)th a httle ' ni che \Vhee 1 could find my cre.ative inrle- voice
interfe.rence Ji-om 1he sunoumling social, cui1Ural context. lt ollowed
me l() imagine. invcnlund lL'iC lll}' litnliL'i )' rn:-ely. t... ] In lll)' declrt)llC()Uslic
compositions my itncr voiccs spcak nnd in thal fo nn] h:l\c bccn ablc lo makc
lhcm public (\Vcstcrlwmp l988: 133-4)

3.2.2 Dala Acquisilion

/\coustic ecology's ind:il'idunl nppronches lo sound recording from the 1970s have
mostly been replaced by more quantitative. techn_iques and modem GIS models.

Listening -oncedescribed as themost fundamentalmethod to explore and understand

lhe soundscape- is nota part of soundscape rescarch in most scienlific disciplines
anymore. whi1e sound r<:cordmg is still popular. Using real environmental data 101ght
be hardertocollecl than s tatistical valuc:; on :;ound (.st.-e below), bul il is still unbeatablc
in tcnns of accuracy. Prctcsting thc sotmdscapc oflhc rcscarch arca is onc way lo gct to
knmv the acouslic
and lo single out possible sound events for recording.
This can either he accomplisbed by soundwalking th.rough the research are a (see the
empirical stuody in Lisbon in 3 4 1) or sctting up microphones lo la1er deconSlnct lbe

l'CCOJ'ding
IWle perfomled piloj souJld recotdings 1o eaplu1e all available soutld ea1egones
and lo
them with specific landscape d Janlcteristics (e.g. roads.
co nstruclion,

1zone) (PapadimitrC)u l ni. 2009: 129).

After a possible pretest. recording is conductoo with a precise setup taking into
accounl technology. placernem . and installation. Today. this lechnique is uscd
espccally to find out about noise issues in urban "roas. Pamanikabud's (2009: 24)
approach lo rccordmg noisc data on sevcral localions alon g lhc s1dc of molorway''
is cxtrcmcly prec ise ir:
dala are collcc-lcd using prccision sound lc vel mclcrs set on tri t)od with thc

hcight of 1.20 m from ground surfncc. Thcsc so\lnd lcvcl mctcrs are

Geographie:i oJ Urbau Sound

98

nmdoml}' ni the d ishmccs 1m fur1 hcr flom lhc edg.c <>f nc.ur
(Pamaniknbud 2009: 2$)

frontugc road

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" (20 11: 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.<! into standard gJids with

s1ze

o fS OO rn x 500 m (2009: 967).

Papadimitriou el al. use fewer sta tions but a tighter grid o f 350m d istances. l11e
purpose of positioning microphones this way "could ensure the recording of a
great variety of sounds from differen t 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 duralion 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'l g. and night combined is named
Problems recordmg sound generally do not occur because of technology
but lhc c haractcr 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 ured by thc surfaccs it strikcs (Ga\'er 1993: 4).
This shows again how crucia l 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 above). It d<X:s not produce

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 w hich, 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 E uropean 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 statistica l 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 ofUrban 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: 1185) 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 1970s, but
GIS software researchers today are able to produce severa! mapping concepts for
onc sccnario using high-pcrformancc computers (Kornfcld 2008): "According
to our encod ings, 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 up. 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 momi ng, aflemoon, and eveni ng 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

Sound in the City

101

et a l. 201 1: 522). The results of the added noise data fina JIy depend on the accuracy
and the number of recording poim s.' \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 offe rsenonn 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 dis play 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 diffe rently. 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 im portnnt
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 im bault 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 fin d 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 fro m 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) fee lings 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

Geogrophie:i of Urbau Som1d

102

(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 firsl
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 pre dcfincd art:a. Thus. thc group of rcspondcnts can d illCr
fro m a ra ndom sc lcction or pcopJc on si te to rccruilcd sound c xpc 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-lowc vcr, to gain initial background infonnatlon on a ccrtam
narra ti ve intcrvicws can be o f valuc . In thc c ase 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 e nsure accuracy hut integrate the individual ele ments 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 Diffc ren1

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

O l'

rnechanical sounds

(Shafer 1969). Namre sounds are defincd as Jhe mos1 plcasing, mec.hanwal
sounds as thc m ost annoymg (Scha fc 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 acous tic 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. 1999). background noise, mechanica1 equipment. Bnunan activities,

Sound in the City

no ises

of

oature,

human

prese.nce.

and

103

spee.c h

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 s uch 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 10). 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 o f lhc
entirety o f sounds. '"T he question is, which type.s o f notation will be m os( helpful
in lhese pursuits? A l 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<: distribution of sound evcnts.. (Tmax 1978: n.p.). Schafer
lncs di lTc:rent \Va)'s to dcconstruct thc soundsc:tpe. m which thc: restarchcr s role
bccomcs a dctcmu ning factor. ll takcs nol only thc quantitativc data o f sotmd
events bul a lso individual evalualion to create a prope r classification system:
u will ooly be accom.plished by a new general ion of artist-scientists trained in

acoustic ecology and acoustic design" (Schafer 1994: 134) The result is believed
lo be compatable 10 an object of smrealis tic art thal "also depends on btinging
logether mcongruou:; or anachronistlc facts, whJCh nevel"theless somehow snap
togcther lo illuminatc now rclationships' (Schafcr 1994: 133).
Most of Lhc time thc \Vorld Soundscapc Projcct annl yzcs thc s ingle sound
events 1he soundscape con sists o f. Acoustic att1i butes like 1oudness and frequency

nre impo11ant but no1 preferenliaJ for classificntion Coule;-:1 and, mos1 of al1,

meaning build the base for detennining sounds Sound ob.iects- described above
as the recorded equivalent to 1he sound event- are lackillg both. "(A)wl'eness
of sound sym bolis m wi ll be: uscful in trymg 10 decide: which :;ounds we want to
prese rve in lhc world ::md which wc wanl lo supprcss" (Schafcr 1970: 1S). Thc
answcr lo lh is qucslion of prcscrvablc sounds lics in thc individual intcrprctation
of lhe researcher. social heliefs. and time . The lalle r refers to a constantly

changing urban soundscape thal is expanded tluough the sounds of industry 's

heavy machinery. Fordisn automolive engines. and turn-of-lhe-millennium

mobile phones and lntemet communication devices. H(A)fter the Industrial

Geogrophie:i of Urbau Sound

104

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
perceplion is su iwble. especially in 1he conslruclivisl approacb of viability -

O l'

..

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<wc-mcnt of pcrception, judgnwnt and invention (Sch:fer 1994: 133)

In Schafers perspecti ve. nat\tre crea tes the most positive sounds for the human ear.
Wind shaking the le:wes of tn..."<!s, b1rds singing. tu1d water flowing are exrunples.
That naturc sounds "have endurcd lhc longcst" is quite obvious, butlhcy are also

desc1i bed as being 'moslly pleasing lo man" (Schafer 1970: 14) . The calegol)'
of human sounds coosists o r people "s voices, the rustl ing of c loth, and s hoes
billing lhe ground. ele. Ile does no1 give a descriplion for lhe words p/e(l$ing or
unpleaslmt. in contrnst to eleclric and mechanical sounds. Techr'IOlogy - at least

in Schafers 1970s perspec1ive - has a positive and ftuure-oriented connotation lo

most people. For him. tcchnology sounds are far lcss plcasing than naturc sounds
(from herc 1 will use thc tcnn ' technology sound lo descnbc both mccham cal
and e lectric sounds). Noise is o llen named in the oontext of urban sounds that are
caused by mechanical or e lecltic sou rces. In addilion to ge.ttin g people to liste n

lo lile ir enviro1unen1. the purpose of the World Soundscape Projecl is lo sensilize

listeners lo perceive sounds in a cena in way :
1t \Vill only be posstble to discnminate againsl the sounds of a oonscienceless
tec.Jmoh)gy ond mullle its plangent voice when its soundS)'H'tbolism d1anges in
thc imagination of sutlicienl numben; of men (SchafCr 1970: 15).

In addilion. Scbafer spo1s four ways lo classify single soundscape elements.

depending on context and scientific discipline:
The physictsl and engi neet study acoustjcs: the psychologtsl and phystologtsl
study psychoacustics. the l inguist :md conununications specia1ist
whil- (() lhc pod <md C{lmposcr is Jell l h d<)main ()1" acsthctic.s

(Schfcr 1994: 148).

Corresponding 10 1hese four approaches. sound can be classified:

Sound ilr the City

105

.!:lcco rding 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 accord ing to lhcir cmotjonal or affcctivc qualitics

(acslhctics)(Schafcr 19')4: 133).

Physicnl charnclcristics can be rccordcd quantitativcJy, thcrcby rcducing thc
impact o r individuality. Data like frequency and duration o f a sound Cilll he
measured objectively. A sound Shlt1S with the mtack, whi1e body describes th e 1ime
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 fluc tuations of thc soun d.
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 objective 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. w hich
makes it <.lifficult to catcgorize sound.s an<.l
them from each othcr.
1-lmvcvcr, Schafc r o ffcrs a way to dcconstmcl thc soundscapc accordmg lo thc
meaning of sounds vi a "lheir referential aspect" (Schafer 1994: 137). This aspect
refers 10 the firsl categorizalion of sound events asnalure. human, and tech nology
sounds. So. if lhe sound of n bird singi11g is recQrded , it belongs 10 na1ure nnd

will Jl'IOSllikely ha ve a positive effect on the listener. while the roaring engine of
a motor bike. as a techno logy sound. w ill most likely engender disrurbance for
thc s::1mc pcrson. Ji' the listcncr 1S a fan .>f motorbikcs, thc lattc r
lo be,. a t lcast, problcmatic. 1-low lislc ncrs pcrccivc and associatc a ccrtain sound
event c annol be scientifically ve1ified. \Vhenever soundscape c lassific ation aims
at pro ducing results tbat lead toan .. imm)rovement of perceplion, judgmenl and
invention" (Schafer 1994 133) meaning is inscribed in advance to categorie s like
nature and tecbnology. This may help sensi1ize listeners. but it pu1s perceplion
mto :;ocia! corset o f sfereoty pes and gentrahznuon. Schafe r s re ferc::ntial
aspccts are not limllcd to naturc, human, ami lcchnology sounds. Aspccts h ke
smmd tmd society or quiet and .vilence a re also discuss:cd. Thc fo nncr indicalcs
the prohlem o r socially founded cl ich. The latter makes c)ear that the named
aspecls are c ate-g ories used ve.ry generally. As Chapte.r 4 .5 will show. si lence

ls highly dependent on individual perception and can mean various tlngs

10 1he listener (see also 2.4}. Thus. referential aspects can only be a sta rling
po int for an analysls that l<>c.:atcs revorded :;ounds Wtthin common
tmd
undcrstanding. Acsthctic qua lillcs - the rout1h way o f classifying sounds - is
" probably lhc hardcst o r all ty pcs o f cJa,.sification (Schafcr 1994: 146}. Labeis
like ugly a nd beautiful are relative tem1s that, like meaning, strongly depe nd
on lbe lislener's sound experience. -sounds affect individuals differe.ntly

and

fl

single sound will oflen stimulate f..

(.Schafer 1994: 146)

1 a wide

assortment of reactions ..

106

Geogrophies ofUrban 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 high ly
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). Additiona llevels 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

Sowrd in tire City

107

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 differenli ate 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

Geogrophie:i of Urbau Som1d

108

(Yu and Kang 201O: 625). In addition 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 a nd semantics are importa nt features that are needed lo fully

undersland 1he soundscapes impact on the listener.

3.4

Empirical SCullies in Lis bon , 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. T hc numbcr of rcscarch sifes 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 tr cnstvc. 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

Sound in the City

109

ce11ain localion? 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
rescarc h sitcs. from the dense cily ccntcr lo quict urban
spacc.s. daw was
gathcrcd fo r sound poiut recorrling. This nc w 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 fu ndament 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:n y. 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 ofL isbon lo randomly >!lmple sotl:ld events for the leflbehind 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. Oiinc ur in

Lisbon cxpcicn::.cs. And the 1rn1Tic, the 1rntnc thal shall

lransiJlcd from Gcrman).

cnd (2006: lOS,

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 calis the
!\letaSou of Lisbon is "ex:perienood. perceived sound, that include.s ever)'thing
he arablc, both real and imaginary. Thc sound.scapc, not how it i.s, bu( how it is
pc rccivcd. 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 \va lks wcrc madc. /\s in Schnfcr's c mpiric.al
stud1es ( 1YY4). 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.

Geogrophie:i of Urbau Sound

110

IJeavy traffic aod a high numher of pedestrians dominated the descriptions, and

some of the typical sounds depicted by Wemer (2006)- especially the traditional
research group nol only recorded their soundwalk but
tram - were named.
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 dcscriptio n of .a

rcprcscntativc soundwalk notes:

Wc: slarl our soundwulk nl a lilllc purk North of R un 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<md <H a comer. Th)' 1alk in a iOreign langwtge
( pmhnhly spanish). Ala puhlic parking lottwo curs try lO 11nd a place lo park.
Bchi nd thc-c:rs I can
the river Tejo :md :1 dock (Doc-a dn Mnrinha), Trame

sounds and somc pcople \valkin_g by dominate thc soundscapc, The Tejo is too
tllr away 10 be
AL thc Natiooal Industrial Propcny Innilutc (TI'l'PI) wc
decide lo turn left in lo nn
lo find more silenl acotulic environment.
Undcr thc nrchwly rcvcrbcration is high and thc sound of otr own shocs and
thc clidang of tt.:: camera are thc mosl donu nant somlds. On !he othcr srdc wc
ente.r Rua St.o Julo da Pmc;a aJld tum right We
a littJe uphill and pass the
Porta deAifarm't. C hurch bells begin to ring very loud (probat.l)' li-om dose by
cnthedral S de Lisboa). Therc re altn()Sl no c.urs >assing by. t ul 1 can still hcar
lralTic sound:, From uphill comes the ringtg of :m old trnm. A dog is OOrking.
Bcforc we turn ldi toenter lhc Ruada
a motorbike
us by. Now it
is gcUing quictcr Al thc cnd of Rua da Adi.;a wc continuc our W<llk throt1gh a
small pathwny thlt passes t-wo closcly spaced apartment burldtngs. Again. there
is more eve.beration. J can hear multi ple cana')' birds thal get :oude1'the i'tu1her
1 go. 1 wormm pc.sse.." me h)' and she greets me (''Bom diaj. 1 do not tspond
hc.cmt.':iC ofthe recording nnd c-nter a tri:mg.ulur opcn spuc.e. 1\ lol orsounds can be
hc-ard he re, .Mulliplc c:mnry birds. \vhose c-agcs 1can scc in thc opcn windows of
lhc apartmcnt buadiogs, Thc clicking ofthc en mera is therc. as always, Pcoplc (1
would gucss two man) are yclling at cach othcr. I caonot scc tkm. but il souods
angl)' and emotional. A boy walks b)'. than two older \VOll\ert Therc 1S a light
chop or ripple ofwater.As 1 walk across the 11iangle 1can see a fountojn, where
\\rt'tler lilll s i nto <t st(lll}' busin. 1 t1y 10 record (mi y thc water as 1stcp reall)' closc.
The Rua Norbcrh>de Arajo goes uphill tmd is ruther cuict. 1 c..annot loca k from
whcrc 1 hcnr so m-: trame sounds, 11 is soquict thtll the wind sh"=.ing sorne lea ves
and flowcrs s hou.d be heard in thc rccording. ShortJy bcfbrc tl:c strccl turns lell
thcrc is a small s,rccn spacc bctwccn two buildings on thc ri!hl. From thcrc 1
can see the Tejo and I'CC01'd a contaulet ship's hom 1ha1 Hoats on the nver. (lf
thereare more shpS to be heard in the recording 1c.annot soy. Maybe the visual
impre.':isit'ln supported me ht.aring the ship.) A fcw stnirs go JP the stred and
wc come lo a highly [rcquenled spo1: a place with cnfs and r.:-slnuranls on Rua

Sound ilr the City

lll

Limociro and Rua de S.iio Tom. Trams pas:: by cvcry two minutes aml 1he SQund
<Jf thc wheds Qn lhc: trncks is very sig:ni (ic-ant. A lot of youn.ger people sit in lhc
caf and walk thc place. ma.oy ofthcm hcavily talking. Thcrc is a
playing
thc guitar. Thc sounds of honking cars. ringiog twms. laughing pcoplc. music.
and shoes \Valking mix up. \Ve stop our sOUIHI\valk at a balusttade abo ve Beco
de Santa llelcna (W1ssmaml 20 1O, lrtlns lated from German).
As this e.-.::ample shows, describing

il

soundwalk fo rces 1he rese.mche.r 10 focus

on sound within the urban landscape (the route of the soundwalk is displayed on
Figure 3.1). Sorne passages indica te thal visual impressions are predominan\ for
lh e
More qlllet sound:; like tho:;e caused by \Vind may
alway:; be thcrc but
only notcd whcncvcr loudcr sound sourccs are mi:;smg.
Following thc soundwalks, in a group s cssion individual imprcssions wcrc
d iscussed. Presentation of the pho lograp hed sound sources and lhe environment

helped to prepare for the second phnse of the study.

In lhe second phase single sound events were recordecl. The aim \vasto doconstn1ct
the soundscape further by dividing il imo the tlu-ee main cmegories ofkeynote. signa!,
and soumlmad::. To record kl-j'note
sound :;ignals thc prevtou:; soundwalks
provid,:d suJlicicnt infom1allon. Soundmarks are not as ca\)' lo dctccl. To tlnd out
about sounds that loca.ls as well as tOre igners would de.9::ribe as special for l.isbon,
their CQmmunity. ora ce11ai.n quarte.r, a questionnaire with 1Oquestions was designed.
Two hundred and fony -seven staudnrdized . quantilative inte1views were conducted in

the central quatters of Baixa. Rossio. Chia.do. and Alfama. The mos1 common sound
noted for Lisbon was the orun (34 percent). followed by cars and traffic (25 percent),
and Fado (2 1
lhc lraditional
mus ic style.
which c.bs trict
or part o f Lisbon soundcd
rcspondc..'tlts answcrcd Alfama (35 pcrccnt) most
ollen. BaiJTO Allo (24 pen:enl), Baixa (22 percenl), and lhe river Tejo ( 17 percenl)
received the next-bighesl number of mentions, followed by Chiodo (11 percenl) and
Belem (6 percent).
(3 percent) and Rossio (2 percem) were memioned least
The tag cloud Figure 3.2 illustrates the results. and raises a question about what
sounds in pruticular were
"s pecull.. Ln the
mentioned.
\Vithin thc so--callcd souud c/oud, thc closcr a :;ound (sourcc) i:; placcd to
a disuicl thc more imp011ant it is IOr thc ascribc..--d soundscapc of that d istrict.
/..oca/itie.t, for example, \Vas o nly mentioned in association \Vilh Alfama and
Bairro Alto. Thus. it was place.d be lwee.n those two. Because this sound \vas more

ul

impOilant (i.e.. received more mentions) for lile Bnirro Allo soundscape. il was
posi,ioned next to the districc"s name.
In antictpation of the subsequent study m London, questions according to the
common lrichotomy of naturc, human, and tcchnology sounds wcrc intcgratcd

(Scharcr 1994). Thc rcspondcnls rcc.allcd moslly lcchnolog.y sounds rclalcd

to lra ffic and tr anspon (84 percent), followed by almost equally named human
sounds (70 percent) nnd nalure sounds (69 perce.nl). In refe-rence 10 Yu and Kang

(2010) a question on music was integrated. It's little surprisingly that 94 percent
of the respondents recall hearing music typical for Lisbon or that Fado was the

<

Sowrd in tire City

Figure 3.2

113

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 cou ld
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.

Geographies ofUrban Sound

114

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 prom ising 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, w ithoul 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 si nging were included in this
catego1y. Sound samples lik.e pedestrians talking and newspapermen selling
journals were recorded. A lso 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 examp les.
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<! during field work in London were a
helicopter flying over Greenwich atan estimated height of 150 m/500 feet,
tbe beeping warning signa! of a garbage tmck moviug backwards, music

Sound in the City

115

from a CD pi ayer ll front of a store in Notting lli11, 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-a r 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<Jl in Slamford, thc church bclls of St. Mallhcws Church

-

in Brixton. a nd music coming fmm a restaurant at Paddington Station.

Singular/repetitive/permaneot sound: Sound occurs in a cena in acoustic
pauern. H can appear as one singular evenl. muJtiple time-s w ith certain
moments of silence in be1weeu. or be there permanently. Tite opening
of a doonmd a car engme starling up are exampks. ts a bikc bdl tl1at
IS only rung once. During thc London s tudy, rccordings of rcpc lillvc
sounds inclu.ded n supem1<1rket scanner beeping and an inuse mo11iser
in the streels, both near Elephanl & Cast le. Bells ringing at Tower Hill

and heels clacking on lhe asphalt near Paddington were other examples
Wind is hard to docurnent as most of the t ime il occurs as inte1ference
to the intended sound evenl recordlng nnher th an as the desired event
1lsclf. lf wmd 1s recordcd, it 1S an cxamplc of a
sound .
S uitc asc whccls on London Blidgc. a vcntilation systcm in Grccnwich,
and background music at a Sla rbuck's al Convent Garden fe11 into this

categol}' during tbe London study.

Participating researchers and sl\ldent assistants discussed lhe applicalion of the
classfication syswm fr "arguable.. sounds before fild recordmg began. The
question of sourcc and sound causcd problcms whcn il c amc to assignmg ccrtmn
qua1ilics to sounds. \ Vind, for cxamplc, is undcrstood a s an inanimatc naturc
sound. Determining \Vhether the sound of wind blo":ing leaves in a tree s hould
be classified as animate.. or ..inanimate" was not e asy. In biological lerms tree
and Jea ves count as anima te . For the London s tudy il was decided . however. that

they should be considered inanimate. In the comext of the overall soundscape.

punmg thl sound m th.e same catcgOI)' s wind rather than dog bark
lO
thc rcscarchcrs more uscfuL
To covcr a valicty of dislricts, 12 rcscarch silcs wcrc sct up from S tamford
3. 3). On a variahle roule
to Greenwich , and rrom Brixton to Noll ing Hill
researchers documented any singJe sound evenl that caught their allention. To
illustra.te the sound event. additional pictures were taken and the route was mapped.

All recordings were taken al a distance between half a meter (about 1.6 feet/leaves

Camden
Hackney
Newham

0
Hammer
smlth &
fulham

@
Wandsworth

W.mbeth

t.ondon Btidge

8iiton

Wapl)ing

& <:ntf.e

Gtf'CnMC><l

Figure 3.3

l.ondon

Holl

(0\'@Rt

M"jor ro.sd

w lch

@
Cl t y

Borough

<:hyoftondon

London - Rcscarch Arcas, Including: Area 9: London Bridge

Bromley

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 iffe red (22 pe rcenl lo 2 1 percent of the e ntire co11ection).
!\nd perhaps a liu le surprising fo r an agglomeration like London, nature sounds
fonned the smallest group. with animate and inanimate sounds e ach making up
only 4 percem of tbe documented sounds.
The approach to deconstructing the :;oundscapc through the trichotomy
J l 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<.l both a r:.llhcr loud and a rather quiet part of Auslm. Urbml grcen ::;pace \Vas
mcludcd. as wcll as arcas wilh high traffic and high population dcnsity. A typiCal
:1eighborhood 'vas selected, and Austins emphasis on education wns displayed
J y the researche.r choosing an area with studenls and university buildings. As the
following examples wiH show, the five n1eas each exempllfied a cena in part of the
.;ity and contained ovel'lapping as well as unique sound events. The study s aim
.\'as not to de:;cribe what Ausun "sounds like bec.ause what worts for artistic-like
.)Oundscapc compositions in acoustic ccology won t work for soundscapc rcscarch
m human gcography. l11c rcsulls would be too dctcnninistic. and \vould not lcad
lo leam abmllthe impact o f urban
:o help achieve the goal of the researc h
5ound on people living in a city.
An analysis of localized sounds is liSed to illustra te sound issues in certain
districts of the city. Such an analysis can help sensitize ears for the local
.)ttuation and rsc ncw research qucstions for dealing with
Jssucs and hclp solvc cxisling problems (scc Chaplcr 4). To lcam aboul
:he soundscapc of an urban arca, rcprcscnlativc parts o f that arca havc to be
;)i\.:l..t:U

rv.

R.:s t:.<Jn.;ll

i.ll t:

gt:m::ntlieLI

VGI :-ii VH S

v r llu::: dishid

and conlaining aU re levan! soundscape charac1eristics. Fieldwork

tn research areas starts w itb a general i:lspection to verify physica l dimensions
to se1 up a path for the soundwalk. Likc in Lisbon, soundwalking is used

Zj 1ke r

Aunin Nelgl'lbofflood
l,OOOm

Rosedale

.,North
Llnive rsity

Zilker

Par k

3..4

Austio, TX - Restarcb Arcts

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<Lified lo colle<:l additional inJormation.

In addition to documenting the walk by writing down individual impressions. the
re:;earcher stopped at multiple points to listen even closer to the :;ound:; occurring
on sitc. Dommant sound evcnts- divided into thc trichotomy of nature, human.
and tcchnology sounds - wcrc gcorcfcrcnccd. and additional infonnation about
the stopping po inls was included into a G ISon sile instantly. In addition lo lhedate,
tUne. and posit ion, weatber conditions and individual observalions were noted . A

class 3 decibel measurement device was used 10 document lhe sound level (dB(A)).
As opposed to measuring procedures use-d in acoustic design and UJ'ban planningwhere a :;enes of measurcment:;.
recordings, and a time :;enes including
day. cvc;nmg, night. aml thc scasons are uscd- mca:;uremcnts in thc Aushn :;tudy
tended to providc an ovcrvicw. Thc aim was not lo tlnd out about thc cxact noisc
level al a ce11ain
hut lo eslablish the noise level in perspe.ctive to individual
experiences of the soundscape. To complete documental ion. pholograph.-, were

laken al every stopping point facing lite direclion of lhe predefined roule The
whole soundwalk was recorded on an audio device.
evaluated to detc:m1me
Aftc;r audio -vi:;ual dwumcnting wa:; done. thc data
thc most dominant and typical sounds in tJ1c arca. Mapping, as \vcll as photographs,
audio recording, sound level measurements, and the prolocol o r the individual
experience were used 10 locate one single point on lhe route that was representative

for lhe area, and lhus for lhe whole urbmn dislricl. Findings made possible lhe nex1
step o f the fieldwork: sound poinl recordmg (see Figure 3.5). A somul pomt is a
position w ithin a predefined area where rhe l)'pical soundsc::tpe of thm are a c.an be
cxpcncnccd. lt may be locatcd at onc; of thc :;topping po ints on a soundwalk or
al an individual place that combines most of thc collcctcd data in a rcprcscntativc
way. To record lhe soundscape al lhe sound po inl, a microphone was rlxed on a

LJi pod for the Auslin study. As lhe differenl research areas had lo be comparable,
the recording time was identical (midday). The duration of the recordings was one

hour. The resulls differed in variotlS aspecls. as lhe following descriplions show.
Research area 1: Sixth Street
Sixth Street is pat1 of downtown 1\ustin, covcling roughly 1O x 1O blocks o r thc
capital of Texas. Retween lhe Colorad() River and First Street in lhe Soulh and
the Texas State Capitol al l lth Street in the North, between Nueces Street in lhe

East and Red River S1ree1 in lbe Wesl. the core of Austin is located. 11 con1ains
historie buildings. is an area for business and achninistnuion. and has two nightlife
d i:;trict:;: thc
D1strict and Sixth Street. Many street:; running nonh/::;omh
cxpcn cncc hcavy trame - hkc Guadalupc Strcct, Lavaca Strcct, and Congrcs:;
Avcnuc - nhilc cast-wcst slrccls are gcncrally quictcr. l11c arca around Sixth
Street was picked by lhe researcher bec ause it contains bo th very loud sections,
with henvy lraffic, pedestrians. and music. and also more quiet siles where nature
sounds domina te the soundscape As Figure 3 6 shows. research area 1 covered

three blocks. The soundwalk started on Brazos Slreel and made ils way frorn Sixtb

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<..l. Al 18 stoppmg pomts thc local soundscapc was documcntcd, at a c.bstancc of
half n block fro m onc anothcr. Thc sound lc vcls varicd from almost 90 dB(A) ncar
a bus station on Congress Avenue lo only 60 dR(A) al the comer of San Jacinto
Boulevard and Seventh Street. The area was dominated by lechnology sounds
caused by c.ars. busses..
conS1n1ction work People walking the streets and having

conversations with other pedesttiruls oron theil' Jnobile phones wel'e common sound
event.s. Birds almost exclusively
nanue sounds in the downtown area.
In thc analysis of sound cvcnts and lhctr occurrcncc. lhc sound point was idcntiflcd
on Brazos Strcct. in bclwccn stopping po ints 2 ;md 3 o r thc soundwalk. T hc bus
route, constant lralc ft()w, and hearable birds were strong factors for c.hoosing the
site, as we.U as nearby Sixdl Street, with its higb number of pedestrians. During
recordings 1O differenl technology sounds were documented. followed by four
human sounds. Birds were the only m1t\1re sound in tite aren. Cars were by fru lhe
most dominant sound
\Vllh
97.94 percenl ofthe
Birds. m
sc"COnd place. occlU'rcd 68.78 pcrccnl of lhc lime, followcd by lalking pcoplc (26.26
perce.nt). Even though birds were the second mosl common sound in the area,
nalure SQunds were the leasl importan! in general. Overall, only 22.92 percent of the
sounds were caused by nature, while 25.20 percent had a hllman source More than

half of the soundscape (5 1 87 percent) was shaped by technology. The high number
of cars and other vehicles, responsible for mo;t of the high sound leve! resulls. raises
aboul thc unpact of trafflc on thc urban dwdlcr. Thts
to back up
thc thcory that noisc-cxposurc maps and rcgulations lo mim nuzc sounds c auscd by
traffic are an issue in city planning. This will be
in 1he next chapter (4.2).
AJtOlher
ques1ion concems the. hranding of a city through sotmd. As tbe
soundwalk followed a J>arl of Austin 's most famous live-music district. Sixth Streel,

the marginal ap>earm1ce of music in recor\lings (4.47 pere<:nt) could l>e explained
as a resuh of the lime of the recording (midday). Bu1for a c iry 1lu11 la beis ilself 1he
Ltvc Muste Capital of t hc World, a totuist 1mghl cxpcct more whcn visiting Stxlh
Strcct cvcn during thc day. Scction 4.3 will focus on livc music.
Research urea 2: Unive 1:\'ity o.fTexas campus

The campus of the-Unh'ersity of Texas a1 Austin contained not one buttwo of the
selected research Meas. CoJnpal'ed lo area three. hHetstate 35. whic h focuses on
lraffic tiOUnds. area l WO capn1res the l)'pic.al SOUndsCp<: of campUs liJ(:. \Vilh an
cxtcnsion fro m Marlin L uthcr King Boulcvard m lhc south to Dcan Kccton Stn..:cl
in thc north, and from Guadalupc Strccl in thc cast to Leona Strcct in lhc wcst on lhe other side of lnterstate
- the university campus all bul encompasses

lhe core of Austin 11 is surrounded by mojor roads wilh a lot of trnlllc sounds
and contains pedestriao areas and parts where cars with a speciaJ pennission and
city busses are allowed to drive. Research area two (see Figure 3.7) covers all

..
e

--

11

Q)

RKO<lng polnt

SOUf'ld Point

Lm

Loc.otiooof

;)ngle)

,...

150"
Ayt.fol!)e d!UAJ

Figure 3.7

Austin, TX - Research Arca 2: Oni\'ersity ofTexas Campus

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 side - e lose to the university
tower- Jnostly human sounds are heard Nat\lre sounds occur aH ruound the ruea
e:;ptcially be :;poned near waJkways where no cars allowed. From 24th

and

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,
1alking to e.ach other, and having celJ phcne conversntions. Al so common we.re the

sounds ofbirds and leaves 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
was by far thc mosl dominan! onc in thc rcscarch arca
sound of pcoplc

(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 1O 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.a r 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 is cuss the issue ofaudio guides

in detail.

Sound in the City

125

Research dll!tt 3: /nterst(lle 35

The se.c ond are a on campus was chosen beca use it conla ined the sounds caused by
lmffic on major roads. highways. and inteJ'stales, T hus. lnteJ'state 35 is less cubic
than the fou r o ther research areas. H follows Dean Ke<:ton Street, covers a part
of thc,; parkmg arca of thc Lync..lon B. Johnson L ibral}. and fo llows [ntc rstatc 35
for o whilc (Figure 3.8). Slarling al thc comer of Easl Campus Dlivc 1 Mcdical
Arts Street a nd Dean Keeton Street, the soundwalk continued clown the latter

lO Red River Slreel. Tuming righl il entered lbe parking area and circled back
lo Dean Keeton. Over a walkway lhe roule reached lnlerstale 35 Recordings
were made along tl1e highway. Back on Dean Keewn 1he soundwalk conlinued
undcr the Jnterstatc to reach tts cnd on thc east site of 35. The most quietlocation
was rccordcd at thc
comer o f thc parking arca (58.2 dB(A)). Sound
lcvcl mcasuring al about thrcc fcct (i.c. about onc meter) 'rom an lntcrstatc lanc
showed 93.7 dR(A). the overall maximum value for a l1 five research areas. Tra ffic
sounds were so dominant that additional subcategories \vere create.d to beHer

capture the diJTerent sound impre-ssions. Traffic from Interstate 35 was measured
separa1cly from thc cars on the other streets. Traffic wailing al lights produced
sounds that wcre also cxcluded from thc general traffic c;:HegOI)'. For sound
po inl rccording a sitc away from thc intcrstalc was scloctcd. to incJudc but nol
oven ate the latter reJating lo the overall sound situation in Auslin. AnaJysis shows
that 11 different techno logy sounds added to the sonndscape, cmnhined \Vith four
human and three nature sounds Nature and human sounds together accotmted for

aboul 14 percent ofthe soundscape (4 91 percent and 8.65 percen1. respeclively).

while 85.96 perc-ent were technology sounds. According w this. lhe 1hree sounds
occumng the most werc lnterstatc 35 traffic, which is hcard all the time (100
pcrccnt), cars on othcr major and minor roads (69.64 pcrccnt). and trame waiting

atli ghls (42.92 percent).

The resulls emphasize tbe need for a discussion ahouttroffic aod lraffic noise.
As section 4.2 wiJI show, traflic plays a major role in discussions about noise in
urbrul environments. It is essentinl to urban planning ruld can cause seJ'ious hearing
loss and other physical trauma. as section 2.2 has shown.
R cscarch arca -1: 1lydc Park

While traffic sounds along lnte rstate 35 produced the loudest sound samples of
a U record ings in a ll research areas, Ilyde Park contained the quie.test ones. Ilyde

Park is an old neighborhood nonh of Central Austin and the universily campus
that consists of moslly single-family homes and a lot of vegetalion like trees.
bushes. and grass. Jts soulhem border ts 38th Strcet. from \Vhtch lhe neighborhood
cxtcnds northward to 51 st Strcct (Figure 3.9). Guadalupc
is thc 'vcstcm
bordcr, whi1c Duval Strcct and Red Rivcr S trccl define thc arc a in thc cast. Thc
researcher selected the two bloc.ks be tween 48th and 49th Street, Duval Street and

Avenue G, because lhey are lhe quieteS! par1s of the llyde Park neighborhood.
The bus lane on Duval Streel and the traffic stands 51SI Street are the loudest
areas of 1he dis1rict. The firsl stopping point of 1he soundwalk was the comer of

1!,

,:;
'1!'
i

1 :; _,

l'<

.
1!o
,
JI.

;,
' { lr
1

..,on

--"
-...
.S"
.:.;

...
<"
:

.e

""

0::
"

><:

...

1!

.=

"'!
..,

.S
- -<=
e

<

t 8 ir 11

Geogrophie:i of Urbau Sound

130

the Colorado River Lo fo llow tbe creek upstream. Before the trail crossed Bm1oo
Springs Road the route tumed right to cross Ban on Creek over a footbridge On
the other side. the soundwalk continued downstream bel:ween the creek and one
of Zilker Park, major op<:n >lrti. 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 site on thc soundwalk wns: thc c nding poinl
al Lo u Neff Poi ni (56 dB(A)). The quietes! sile was on lhe northwesl side 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 sites of the soundwalk. .Toggers. wal kers. 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 soulhc asl
bank ofBmion Creek, on the hike-and-hike trail . B ird sounds occurred the most in
recordin gs (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). closely fo llowed by
n:.lture sounds (36. l 2 percent).
sounds accounted for 23.05 pe rcent
oCthc soundscapc at Barton Crcck. Thc rclativc balance of sounds also s howcd m
the d iffe rent sounds recorded, with tOur nature, five human, and seven techno logy
sounds. ln all other researc h 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 1istene r and im pact 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 mc a:;. the following i:;sues :;tand out:

How imp011ant is a c ity brand Ji ke 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 city and the
quality o f life of its inhabitants?

Sound in the City

13 1

\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
on lhe various uses of sound in the c ity.

'"ill focus