The two places I visited were an underground tunnel, similar to the one we were in in Bern and the Food Market in HPH.
The primary function of the underground tunnel is to simply cross the road at a place where a crosswalk would disturb traffic. Because of that, it is a bare concrete space which creates a highly reflective environment. The sound in the tunnel was loud with a lot of reverb. The closer I was to the microphone the more one could hear the reverberation. Longer continuous sounds produced more reverb than shorter ones. Footsteps and voices were louder, echoing along the corridor. Sounds from passing vehicles were surprisingly loud. The space was cavernous and “boomy”.
Geometry-wise the space was a long narrow parallelepiped with smooth concrete surfaces. Because of that, the space acts as an echo chamber. Overall, it felt alive and echoey, making all sounds “boomy”.
In contrast, the Food Market in HPH is designed both for comfort and function. It is a space where students gather both to socialize and to study – two use cases which I thought wouldn’t fit well together in the same space. However, the open-plan design with tall ceilings makes sound dissipate quite easily, allowing for both functions. Even though you can hear noise from the people around you, you cannot easily make out what they are saying. In the recording sound gets quiet quickly once the speaker is behind you or further away from you. Sounds do not linger so even when the space is full it doesn’t feel overwhelming. Footsteps are fairly clear but disappear quickly.
The space feels a bit “dead” acoustically due to the minimal echoes despite the large open design. The part of the space which I recorded in also simplifies to a large parallelepiped despite the fact that the whole Food Market has more complex geometry. Sound was very clear in close proximity to the microphone.
2 Exploring the Emotional Impact of Everyday Sounds
Situation 1: Meierhofplatz
I went to the intersection on Meierhofplatz during the evening rush hour to listen to the sounds there. All sounds I heard were man made and were related to the traffic there – car engines, horns, bicycle bells and emergency vehicle sirens. There were also a lot of pedestrians talking. Emergency sirens and car horns stood out the most, while conversations often drew my attention. It felt a bit stressful and too loud. The sounds which were of higher frequency and/or higher volume were the most disturbing to me. Knowing that there was heavy traffic around I felt the need to stay alert of my surroundings. If I were to hear screeching of tires, I would become very alert. Loud shouting would have caused me discomfort.
Situation 2: The forest near the Hönggeberg campus
I went for a walk in the forest near the campus. Most of the sounds I heard were natural and involved bird songs, wind rustling the leaves and occasional movement of animals off the path. Sometimes I would hear man made sounds such as the steps of joggers on the path or quiet conversations. The chirping of birds dominated the soundscape. Their song was short, higher in frequency and volume and it drew my attention. At the same time, I would be drawn to man made sounds as they were quite rare. I felt relaxed in this environment. Nature sounds always calm me down and the man made sounds were quiet and rhythmic and thus felt pleasant. The forest itself reinforced the positive feelings. Sudden noises like shouting or unexpected animal noises would cause me to be alert and would be of discomfort to me.
3 Empirical and numerical estimation of room acoustic properties
Task 1
HPH
The estimated reverberation time was 0.54 seconds. I could not observe any echoes in the picture. The reverb time was measured by tripling the 20 dB drop.
- Decay Measured: Approx. 30 dB drop measured in 0.27 sec (×2 = 0.54 sec)
- Echoes Visible: No significant discrete echoes observed.
Tunnel
The estimated RT60 time was 2.64 seconds based on tripling the 20dB drop time. Echoes were clearly visible in the recording.
Task 2
The numerically estimated reverb time was quite different from my observations. I believe that this was because it was quite difficult to accurately describe my spaces using the presets of the software. Thus empirical values were better.
HPH
(Setting used was open plan office with similar dimensions)
- Calculated RT60 (500 Hz): 0.31
- Calculated RT60 (1000 Hz): 0.26
Tunnel
(Setting used was corridor with similar dimensions)
- Calculated RT60 (500 Hz): 2.13 seconds
- Calculated RT60 (1000 Hz): 2.18 seconds
