In the acoustics community, sound in the environment – especially that made by other people – has overwhelmingly been considered in negative terms, as both intrusive and undesirable. The strong focus of traditional engineering acoustics on reducing noise level ignores the many possibilities for characterising positive aspects of the soundscapes around us. Desirable aspects of the soundscape have been investigated in the past, mainly by artists and social scientists. This work has had little impact on quantitative engineering acoustics, however, perhaps because of barriers to communication across different disciplines.
The Positive Soundscape Project set out to change this. The project was a consortium of five universities – Salford, Warwick, Manchester, Manchester Metropolitan and London Arts – and ran from 2006 to 2009 with a budget of £994k from EPSRC. The aims of the project were:
The methods used were strongly interdisciplinary, with insights from sonic art, interviews and sound walks, as well as laboratory experiments on listeners all used to provide a better account of the relationship between the soundscape and the perceptions of those within it.
The project produced many outputs. A published summary of the scientific findings stated “Qualitative fieldwork (soundwalks and focus groups) have found that soundscape perception is influenced by cognitive effects such as the meaning of a soundscape and its components, and how information is conveyed by a soundscape, for example on the behaviour of people within the soundscape. Three significant clusters were found in the language people use to describe soundscapes: sound sources, sound descriptors and soundscape descriptors. Results from listening tests and soundwalks have been integrated to show that the two principal dimensions of soundscape emotional response seem to be calmness and vibrancy. Further, vibrancy seems to have two aspects: organisation of sounds and changes over time.”
The team behind this project came from a very wide range of disciplines - social science, physiological acoustics, sound art, acoustic ecology, psychoacoustics, product perception and room acoustics. The range of methods and outputs is demonstrated by this table showing the parts of the Positive Soundscape Project.
|Part||Method||Main output||Reference||Inputs from||Outputs to|
|a||Soundwalks and interviews||Qualitative: semi-structured interviews||Cognitive soundscape components||Davies et al. (2013)||c, h||b, c, f, g, h, i, j, k, l|
|b||Focus groups||Qualitative||Cognitive soundscape features||Davies et al. (2013)||a, h||f, h, i, j, k, l|
|c||Listening tests||Quantitative: semantic differential scales||Perceptual dimensions: calmness and vibrancy||Cain et al. (2013) & Hall et al. (2013)||a, h||d, e, i, j, k|
|d||Neuroscience||Quantitative: fMRI scans||Validation of perceptual dimensions; brain images||Irwin et al. (2011)||c||i, j, k|
|e||Physiological||Quantitative: heart rate, galvanic skin response||Relationship of basic physiology to perception||Hume & Ahtamad (2013)||c||i, j|
|f||Speech intelligibility||Quantitative: signal processing and listening tests||Draft modification to speech intelligibility index||Davies et al. (2009)||a, b,||i, j|
|g||Soundscape simulator||Artistic and quantitative||Simulation device/method and webpage||Bruce et al. (2009) & Cusack: The Sound Database||a, j||b, i, j, l|
|h||Favourite sound||Artistic: field survey and recording||Favourite sounds database and CD||Cusack: Favourite Sounds||a||a, b, c, i, j|
|i||Exploration of positive soundscapes||Artistic: multiple original commissions||Art exhibition||Cusack et al., Sound Escapes, Space Gallery, 129 - 131 Mare Street, London, UK. Curators A. Carlyle and I. Revell (25 July – 15 August 2009)||All||f, g|
|j||Conceptual framework||Qualitative: deskwork||Sound-scape perception model||Jennings & Cain (2013)||All||All|
|k||Soundscape planning and assessment||Qualitative: deskwork||Methods for planning and assessment||Adams et al. (2009) & Davies et al. (2009)||a, b, c, d||i, j|
|l||Soundscape expectation||Qualitative: interviews and observed simulator use||Model of expectation, context and competence||Bruce et al. (2009)||a, g||i, j|