"Embedded Sound" published in On Site review 28:sound

 

"The sounds that animate architecture, and the ways in which architecture augments those sounds, can be examined by observing the essential qualities of constructed space: material and geometry.  These characteristics, plus scale and construction method, inform soundscapes that are embedded within all built environments. 

As an exploration of how sound is shaped by space, and how experience is shaped by acoustics, I offer a series of vignettes describing three distinct sites and the way in which I perceived them to be particularly defined by the acoustical quality of the architecture.  The focus is not on the behavior of an imposed sound source or signal, but rather on the ambient conditions of inhabitation." (pg 38)

on site review is an independent journal and print magazine edited by Stephanie White and published twice a year, in the Spring and the Fall.  Issue 28 centers on the theme of sound. You can listen to tracks associated with articles here and read more about the journal here.

Projected Auscultation

Projected Auscultation is a theoretical proposition which explores the creation of a social network connected only by the projected sounds of the human body.

Internal sounds are picked up by a microphone, amplified, and projected into the surrounding space. Simultaneously they are projected out to a network of locations around the city (or globally?) and amplified into these other public spaces as well.

Modified urban furniture could potentially serve as points of connection/collection of body sounds in the public realm. There are a number of different ways that this type of biometric data could be collected...perhaps even with an app for a smart phone.
 

Sounds captured at point "A" are projected at various locations as "a" 

Meanwhile, sounds captured at point "B" are projected at various locations marked "b", creating overlapping conditions. 

And so on...

A (low-quality) simulated audio experienced can be accessed here:


At any given moment there may be multiple people connected to this web of auscultation. In this way, when you participate, you become connected to the public solely through the acoustics of the inner body.  You are able to hear your own individual characteristics in conjunction with others, and subsequently, you are contributing to the formation of a temporary and constantly changing social network of displaced sounds.

Perceiving Environments through Acoustic Events

Lately, I have been referencing John Hull’s book “Touching the Rock: An Experience of Blindness” and I will again today as it presents a plethora of observations on the nature of perceiving the world through senses other than sight. At one point, Hull describes the experience of crossing a busy intersection and the confidence with which he is able to navigate the situation due to the pattern of acoustic cues that are present at the site.

“The noise of the traffic, coming from either direction, was full and rich, the peripheral sounds made by people walking on the footpath, louder on this side of the road, fainter on the other side, and all of the other echos and contours made up that acoustic shape which I call the Bristol Road. In a few moments the noise of the traffic would change. Instead of the present movement of approaching and departing rushes of sound there would be the purring of engines idling on either side. Between would be a silent space.” Hull, pg 149

A couple years ago I made a recording at a T-shaped intersection in Cambridge, MA. I was fascinated by the amount of information that was embedded within the recording itself regarding speed, direction of turns, relationship to my recording position, and of course, a documentation of the events that occurred. The recording communicates an environment of sweeping movement and dynamic fluidity.  Listen below:


The increased importance of movement and event in the constructed understanding of one’s surrounding landscape is later addressed by Hull.

“I can tell when things are moving by the sounds they make. Cars swish past, feet patter along, leaves rustle, but a silent nature is immobile. So it is that, for me, the clouds do not move; the world outside the car window or the window of the train is not moving. The countryside makes no noise as the train passes through it. The hills and fields are silent.” Hull, pg 179

The association of silence and static objects is somewhat straightforward, but by suggesting that static objects in the world in essence no longer exist since they are no longer present in one’s perception of the environment, presents opportunities for investigation and discovery. Imagine taking a photograph (or a video) and eliminating any element which does not move/make perceptible sound....how would the world be altered? 

Coming next: Projected Auscultation...linking public spaces with body sounds

 

Acoustic Effects of Precipitation

Last night it snowed for the first time this season and today it is rainy and stormy.  It seems only fitting to post about the acoustic effects that precipitation has on the perceived environment as recounted by John Hull in his book “Touching the Rock: An Experience of Blindness.”  I have included excerpts from this book previously in the post on facial vision, and it is almost certain that there will be more to come as my copy of the book is currently filled with an abundance of post-it tabs.

Concerning rain, Hull writes:

“Rain has a way of bringing out the contours of everything; it throws a coloured blanket over previously invisible things; instead of an intermittent and thus fragmented world, the steadily falling rain creates continuity of acoustic experience.

I hear the rain pattering on the roof above me, dripping down the walls to my left and right, splashing from the drain-pipe at ground level on my left, while further over to the left there is a lighter patch as the rain falls almost inaudibly upon a large leafy shrub. On the right, it is drumming with a deeper steadier sound, upon the lawn. I can even make out the contours of the lawn, which rises to the right in a little hill....” Hull, pg 29-30

I am interested in the observation that through continuous percussion, or percussive activation of the environment, we are able to form a more unified and informed understanding of our surroundings.  That the material characteristics of an object can be revealed through the high speed smack of a raindrop is compelling in itself, but that an entire "scene" can be understood through the simultaneous smacking of millions of droplets from the sky, seems to me, to present possibilities for the exploration of three-dimensional environments solely through aural means.

“The rain presents the fullness of an entire situation all at once, not merely remembered, not in anticipation, but actually and now. The rain gives a sense of perspective and of the actual relationships of one part of the world to another. 

If only rain could fall inside a room, it would help me to understand where things are in the room, to give a sense of being in the room, instead of just sitting on a chair.” Hull, pg 31

Though differing in intention, Rain Room by rAndom International, creates the framework necessary for it to rain inside a room.  Check out the installation here: http://random-international.com/work/rainroom/

Later on in the book, Hull revisits the impact of rain on his perception of the world in a more analytical way.  In addition to the cohesive view he describes above, Hull acknowledges that the differentiation that rain reveals, is what develops the richness of the now accessible "view".  For instance, Hull recounts that he first notices differences of place (in relation to his own body eg. left, right, above, below), next there are differences in speed (slow drips, rapid cascades), followed by differences in intensity (exposed areas versus sheltered areas).  Finally, differences in pitch and volume emerge relating to the material that is being struck and its orientation relative to the sky.

"This built up into a complex pattern. The more intensely I listened, the more I found I could discriminate, building block upon block of sound, noticing regularities and irregularities, filling dimension upon dimension.” Hull, pg 132

In contrast to rain, snow has the opposite effect by taking away information.  There is a saying that snow is the blind person's fog.  Hull explains why:

“What I suffer in the snow is a loss of knowledge. All my familiar points and markings, the different grades and textures of grass, gravel, asphalt and concrete, are obliterated." Hull, pg 156

The softness of a snow fall, which has no audible impact on the landscape, and the subsequent acoustic insulation that results from a thick blanket of snow, effectively shrink the area of the aural environment that one can perceive.  

“Apart from the white cane, and the sounds from the environment, the body’s knowledge of its surroundings does not exceed its own dimensions.” Hull, pg 157

It is strange to think that only a precious few degrees Fahrenheit separate a vast and accessible world from an exceedingly limited field of perception. 

RECAP #7 - "The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

Yale School of Architecture

"The Sound of Architecture"
October 6, 2012 2pm - 4pm

The Sound of Architecture at Yale School of Architecture

 

“Listening is the process of confronting expressive movements around us” - Brandon LaBelle

Here we are at the final session of the symposium! I had been looking forward to this last portion since the last speaker is Brandon LaBelle, who in my opinion, is such an eloquent man. I will go on about him during the recap, but I did want to preface the following summaries by saying that I may have been distracted during the first talks in anticipation of his lecture. Now that I have made my little disclaimer...on to the last recap!

ACOUSTIC SPACE

Sabine von Fischer “Intimate and Infinite Space”
                I appreciated the structure of von Fischer’s talk which was organized around a selection of terms relating to the study of sound environments from the 1920’s-1970’s. The terms presented were: the aural, sonosphere (sonisphere?), soundscape, acoustic space and acoustic horizon. These words were coined (or more explicitly defined) at varying times in the last century and through a range of texts, though by now they have all pretty much been widely appropriated. For instance, von Fischer refers to R. Murray Schafer’s distinction of “soundscape” from the 1960’s or Peter Sloterdijk’s use of the word “sonosphere” in the 1990’s which was used in Michael Southworth’s 1965 master’s thesis at MIT. Through tracing the history and evolution of these terms, von Fischer was able to track the changing attitudes towards pace, sound, and architecture. Additionally, she was able to move between technical and scientific investigations while emphasizing the importance of language and description communicating a rich and multidimensional understanding of auditory space and the experiments that advanced and explored it.

Alexander Nemerov “Acoustic Shadows: Macbeth and the Civil War”

               Nemerov, who has explored the specific topic addressed in his talk in the book Acting in the Night: Macbeth and the Places of the Civil War, concentrated on describing a single performance of Macbeth in 1863 as a particular moment which encapsulates the cultural, spatial, and political forces of the time. Through a detailed study of all aspects of that day, October 17, 1863, including the performances (namely that of leading lady Charlotte Cushman), the theater itself (the architecture of Grover’s National Theater), and the political climate at the time (the “acoustic shadows” of Civil War battles in the distance), Nemerov is able to communicate the interconnected nature of seemingly disparate realms.

Veit Erlmann “Biology, Environment, and Sound: Jakob von Uexküll Revisited”
                Erlmann pretty much lost me a couple sentences into this lecture. Perhaps it was because I am not really familiar with the specific language which seemed to overwhelm the research he presented, or possibly because I had not been previously acquainted with the work of Jakob von Uexküll. Regardless, it was a pity that felt I could not follow the train of thought and ideas presented, as after a cursory glance at Uexküll’s research concerns and findings, I feel that it had the potential to be a rather illuminating talk. Uexküll, a German biologist active during the early 1900’s, was particularly interested in investigating how living beings (studied through ticks, jellyfish etc) perceive their environment in reaction to sensory data. It seemed as though Erlmann was arguing for the importance of Uexküll’s perspective in terms of human awareness, and emphasizing the value of considering the way we construct our environment through perceived experiences particularly with regards to sound. Here’s one quote from the lecture I found noteworthy: “Space is to the aural architect as the spiderweb is to the fly.” When the fly becomes trapped, the fly assumes some spiderweb-ness and the spiderweb assumes some fly-ness. I think this scenario of mutual influence and feedback is quite strong and appropriate when considering relationships between our perception of space in relation to the built environment.

Brandon LaBelle “Shared Space”
                I was first introduced to Brandon LaBelle’s books as required reading in the context of a studio art class, “Sound in Time, Sound in Space” taught by Marina Rosenfeld at Harvard University. His writing is descriptive and his observations are thoughtful and perceptive. Check out both his books “Background Noise: Perspectives on Sound Art” and “Acoustic Territories” if you are interested in reading some of his work.

While sound is deeply connected to experiences of sharing and reassurance, LaBelle described as he began his talk, it is also linked to disruption and confrontation. Following this idea, LaBelle turned his attention to an exploration of “noise” which he defined as “sound which oversteps particular limits.” The lecture was broken into three parts in order to examine qualities of “noise” through a selection of art pieces. These were: acoustics multiplied, supplement, and difference making. “Acoustics multiplied” referred to noise as pluralistic and concerned with overlapped acoustical spaces. A piece by Mark Bain explores ideas of vibration by capturing and transmitting energy passing through structures. By embedding an accessible headphone jack into the exterior wall of a building, passersby on the street can “plug-in” to the building and listen to vibrations which are captured by transducers inserted into the foundations of the building. In this way, the public can experience a simultaneous, yet inaccessible, space while remaining a part of the exterior and public street. The idea of “supplement” LaBelle explained, allows for the possibility of another narrative which “brings into question the wholeness of the original with a ‘more than’.” He shared one of his own pieces where he recorded a deaf man reading John Cage’s Lecture on Nothing as an example of this idea.* A second work, “The Sonic Body” introduced a series of “portraits” by LaBelle where he asked people to listen to music on headphones and then recorded the sound of them dancing to the music. All we heard in these recordings were the percussive steps and thumps of feet on the floor, the breathing of the individual, and the occasional sigh or melodic line escaping the participants’ lips. It was really quite fascinating, especially as fundamental qualities of the music they were listening to eventually became evident through the recorded interactions of the body in space, namely, rhythm. With “difference making”, LaBelle was interested in collapsing distance through the introduction of a difference. “Boomerang” (1974) by Richard Serra served as an example. In the video, Serra employs a slightly delayed echo which is played into the headphones of Nancy Holt as she speaks. Holt is listening to her own echo and trying to talk at the same time. You can watch a clip below. The sequence is quite powerful.  Holt alters the speed at which she speaks as she tries to listen to, or align with, her own echo. In LaBelle’s talk we were introduced to several attitudes or approaches to noise. We began to understand the proposal set forth by LaBelle as he observed the inherent qualities of contamination and disruptiveness that are at once productive and uncomfortable when considering noise. 

 

*At this point, I have to note that I am shocked that John Cage was not even mentioned until this point in the symposium! He was so completely concerned with bringing awareness to the aural environment within which we all live! Actually, as I think I have mentioned before, I am extremely critical of the fact that there was practically no mention (and no speakers) that dealt with sound/space/architecture as an artistic medium. Where were the discussions of Lucier, Neuhaus, Leitner? Where were the presentations by contemporary artists/architects actually working to explore the issues introduced in the lectures?

RECAP #6 - "The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

Yale School of Architecture
"The Sound of Architecture"
October 6, 2012 11am - 1pm

The Question of “sound”

The second to last session of the symposium was structured as a panel discussion moderated by Michelle Addington. Participants included Craig Hodgetts, Raj Patel, Joel Sanders, Brigitte Shim, and Karen Van Lengen. While we had not heard from Karen Van Lengen within the context of the symposium previously, she collaborated with Joel Sanders on several projects discussed in his lecture and gave a brief intro to her own work. I am quite disappointed that Karen did not get a chance to speak more, as I found that she had insightful comments and a thoughtful perspective on the subject of the interplay between sound and architecture stemming from her own interest to encourage the desire to listen in a more conscious way.

DESIGNING ARCHITECTURAL SOUNDSCAPES

Michelle Addington, who is a wonderfully articulate speaker, began with a presentation addressing the science of sound broken into four disciplines of study, namely:

physical phenomena (theoretical physics),
phenomenological behaviors (applied physics/engineering),
human psychology (neuroscience), and
human perception (perceptual psychology). 

Addington stated that compared with visual science, our understanding of theoretical physics and neuroscience in relation to sound are particularly lacking. While the actual discussion was framed around the concerns below (see photo), the majority of the conversation revolved around the current relationship of architecture and acoustics. For the most part, acousticians/acoustical consultants are brought in when there is an especially unique or “privileged” experience that must be accommodated and considered, for instance that of a performance hall. In general, acousticians are not consulted by architects with regards to “everyday” environments and conditions, or rather those conditions beyond the scope of a single room. Part of this arises, in my opinion, because architects are not trained to consider the acoustical nature of spaces, and the profound effect that architectural choices (material, geometry, adjacencies etc) has on sound environments and vice versa. Sanders contended that explorations of quotidian spaces fall within the realm of sound scholars and artists, but at this point remains unaddressed by architects. At one point, when Patel, an acoustician, suggested that a rule of thumb for architects to keep in mind when designing was that for every 1 cubic meters of volume one should add 0.2 seconds of reverberation time, someone responded that architects do not want to, and should not, design according to a formula. Of course this is an overreaction, but it serves to illustrate the disjunctive relationship between architects and the sound spaces they end up creating most often by accident and as a resulting effect rather than an integrated consideration. What I found distressing about the discussion was the fact that the speakers kept referring to “sound” as if it was a specific and predictable effect, like light. There was no acknowledgement that when they are talking about “sound” they are actually talking about occupation and activity. I feel that this is one of the fundamental mistakes that often happens when talking about the behavior of sound in spaces, and I think that once the understanding of sound and space is conceived of an understanding of inhabitation, there will be great advancement in the creative approaches to defining spaces.

Raj Patel, Karen Van Lengen, Brigitte Shim, Joel Sanders, Craig Hodgetts

RECAP #5 - "The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

Yale School of Architecture
"The Sound of Architecture"
October 6, 2012 9am - 11am

Collective Sonic Spaces and Public Privacy

Bright and early on Saturday morning (armed with a chocolate croissant and a superfood smoothie), I headed over for the final day of the symposium. The day began with an exploration of “how sound and space intersect to address notions of public and private.”

CIVIC NOISE

Niall Atkinson “On the Aural Creation of Urban Communities in Early Modern Italy”
                Atkinson started us off with the presentation organized around a selection of letters in which the authors, including Seneca, Anton Francesco Doni, Pliny, Machiavelli, and Bronzino, addressed their relationships with urban sounds. Atkinson sought to understand how these aural conditions were the result of architectural situations. For instance, Seneca describes the sounds outside his apartment located above the baths where he could observe the activity and conversation occurring below. Arthur Schopenhauer complains of the incessant cracking of whips outside his window and goings on of the neighbors next door (as he tries to write/read/play the flute) which he can hear because the walls are shared. Anton Francesco Doni observes that as the distinction between public and private, outside and inside are collapsed, one listens more intently. The desire for silence in Pliny’s Laurentine villa describes the effectiveness of a room within a room in order to achieve a space of silence and tranquility.

“Adjoining this is a bedroom, which neither the servants’ voices, the murmuring of the sea, the glare of lightning, nor daylight itself can penetrate, unless you open the windows. This profound tranquillity and seclusion are occasioned by a passage separating the wall of this room from that of the garden, and thus, by means of this intervening space, every noise is drowned.”

In general, I found Atkinson’s talk engaging and thought provoking as it directly placed experiences of an auditory nature in relation to architectural structures, thereby encouraging us to question how qualities like the porosity of walls or the density of houses begins to impact our daily lives. 

Tim Barringer “The Architecture of Victorian Oratorio”
                Barringer followed Atkinson with a lively talk addressing the notion that musical form and architectural form are inherently linked. Moving from the example of the 1859 Crystal Palace which was, among other things, a site for monumental musical performances, Barringer takes us to the Birmingham Town Hall where Felix Mendelssohn's oratorio, "Elijah", was first performed in 1846. Oratorios, he explained, were the dominant form of art in Victorian England and stand in contrast with opera in that they usually deal with religious topics and often the Biblical word. Next he discussed Leeds Town Hall, which was constructed in 1859 and which physically expressed the importance of musical performance by placing the concert hall at the very center of the building while local governmental offices surround it (see plan below). This new architecture demanded new music, and it was delivered by William Walton who, with the debut performance of Belshazzar’s Feast in 1931 incorporated his interest in jazz and (rather spontaneously) the sounds of brass bands (linked to working class mills bands) into his religious cantata. Regardless of whether the architectural connection was ever really explicitly drawn, I was really enjoyed this lecture. This may have had to do in part with the fact that I had never heard most of the works whose excerpts were played before (such wonderful pieces!), but also could have been because I do love listening to a lecture given by someone with a British accent!

John Picker “Noise and Public Privacy in the Stethoscopic Era”
                Picker, author of “Victorian Soundscapes”, began his presentation with a Superman theatrical short from the early 1940s, in which we witness the man of steel’s phone booth transformation from unassuming journalist to superhero. Picker continued with the structure of the phone booth as the main topic of investigation, considering their contemporary re-use (as wi-fi hotspots, pop up libraries or sites for street art), in addition to their emergence and evolution as a space that mediates public privacy. While telephone companies originally rented space from drug stores in order to place them within easy access of the public, telephones eventually moved out of the store and onto the street in order to allow for greater control by the telephone companies. I really appreciated the specific focus of this lecture and found it to be informative and engaging. I only wish that the presentation could have taken the next step and proposed a future structure for the contemporary “floating user”. I found that this last step was lacking in general across the entirety of the symposium. Where were the creatives suggesting ways to engage sound and architecture in the future? Why did it seem that pretty much all presentations were concerned with historical analysis and past precedents, and much less with the active engagement with the topic today?

J.D. Connor “Listening to Carchitecture”
                Connor’s talk centered on the “most widely regulated precision tuned space”, the interior of a car. He framed the lecture through the lens of several car advertisements which emphasized the promise of the car as a sonic bubble within which the driver and passengers are shielded from the confusing, noisy environment of the city streets. Starting with the magazine spread: “At 60 miles an hour the loudest noise in this Rolls-Royce comes from the electric clock.” all the way to a clip of Elliot Scheiner describing the surround sound audio tuning system he helped develop for selected Acura vehicles, and touching upon Hyundai Azera “Modern Life”, VW Jetta “Synchronicity” (this is one of my favorite cars ads ever), and Kia Soul commercials along the way, Connor presented these spaces as intensely interior, offered as a way of escaping civic noise. Public sounds are part of the landscape, and the city exists as an immersive environment through which we are constantly navigating. In a way, the personal space of the car allows us to create a non-linear experience where we have control over what is perceived, thereby superimposing, or rather, embedding, our own desires on the space of the city. Conner skimmed over a couple other interesting points one of which was the issue of “sound branding” and question of what a particular brand of car should sound like. Another, was the role reversal of the interior environment of the car from an insulated and private space, to an active contributor to the “noise” of the city, not only through the sound the car generates itself, but through the leakage that occurs with powerful modern sound systems. I could have seen a whole lecture based around the last topic which to me started to challenge the boundaries of public and private space through the notion of leakage and intrusion.

RECAP #4 - "The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

Yale School of Architecture
"The Sound of Architecture"
October 5, 2012 4pm - 6pm

"If you see better, you think you can hear better"  - Liz Diller

I am happy to report that several of the afternoon lectures incorporated sound and/or video clips! Hurrah! I had been waiting for the “sound” in the “sound of architecture” to be put forth and explored, and while I may not have been completely satisfied by the content of the clips that made it in (always hoping that my particular interests might be addressed), I was nevertheless glad they were present as part of the discussion.

REPRESENTING ACOUSTIC ENVIRONMENTS

Ingram Marshall “Alcatraz”
                With photos by Jim Bengston and a soundtrack by Marshall, “Alcatraz” creates a haunting visual and aural experience that projects the solidity, mournfulness, mystery, and history of the defunct prison island in San Francisco Bay. The piece is broken into several parts of which we listened/watched the following:

Introduction
The Approach
Inside
Rules and Regulations
Cell Doors
Solitary
Escape
End

In general I was more drawn to the soundtrack portion of the composition which incorporated recorded sound, composed sound and speech. Repetition and distortion were used to create rhythms and multiple layers occurring simultaneously created areas of richness and depth within the piece. While Marshall claimed otherwise, the photos had the effect of appearing as in a slideshow, and which I therefore found lacking intensity and relevance. Often there were moments where I was unable to discern the actual image that appeared due to the superimposition of two images, however I suspect that this inability to gain clarity and resolution was most likely part of the intention. Here is a clip on youtube of the sound (without images) of the last movement “End”. What do you think?

Jonathan Sterne “ Sampling Space: A Simple Theory of Convolution Reverb”
                Sterne, known for his books: “MP3: The Meaning of a Format” and “The Audible Past: Cultural Origins of Sound Reproduction” (neither of which I have read I must confess) presented a talk which was concerned with reverberation. More specifically, the process of coding acoustic qualities of physical space into virtual/digitally determined spaces, or convolution reverb. Convolution reverb basically uses the measured impulse response of a physical space and then overlays the resulting information on a digital signal in order to produce the effect of that signal occurring within the original physical environment. The process itself is fascinating and the concept poses questions of reality and artificiality within the realm of sound. Sterne clarifies that he is interested in the “acoustic representation of acoustic space” and the multiplicity of spaces that can be experienced through an audio signal augmented by convolution reverb. I was unable to determine (or decipher from my notes) what position Sterne was taking on the subject, but I can see the blending of spaces through sound leading to a wide range of explorations and proposals. You can visit Sterne’s website here: http://sterneworks.org/ to learn more about his essays, books, and courses.

Randolph Jordan "Constructing an Acoustic History of Vancouver on Film"
                Jordan, who’s “ongoing research explores the intersections between audiovisual media, sound studies, and urbanism” presented a talked that addressed the impact of film sound on soundscape research, specifically within the setting of Vancouver. He used clips of several movies including, “Madeline Is...”, “The Grey Fox” and the particularly intriguing “Hastings Street” which can be viewed on vimeo here: https://vimeo.com/19191802 as examples for the investigations. The filming for Hastings Street took place in 1962 while the post production was completed in 2007. This disjunction creates a false truth that, unnerving as it is, elicits a heightened response and sensitivity to contextual relationships and visual and aural alignments. I do believe that Jordan was the only speaker to address the significance of sound in films, yet clearly there is a rich history within this area of study. Jordan develops his research by focusing on the environmental conditions (as opposed to musical soundtrack) and in doing so brings together the dynamic qualities of video with the dynamic qualities of sound recording. I wish there had been a little more time spent discussing the topic in the broader sense before diving into the extremely site specific study of Vancouver.

Liz Diller “B+/A-”
                Diller’s lecture (for which I have copius notes, and to which I was attentively listening) was an honest, clearly structured explanation of three projects which differed widely in scale, construction, and intention and yet were similar in that they really did not have much to do with the topic of “sound and architecture” in the first place. I have to admit that I was disappointed about this, and found it curious that a symposium with such a specific theme, with such a wide range of possible topics within that theme, didn’t ask a lecturer that was more directly related to the practice of shaping spaces of sound or constructing sounds of space. What a missed opportunity to expand the horizons of the architectural world! Regardless, Liz Diller was a phenomenal speaker who managed to imbue her tone with the quality of familiarity and competence, and who spoke articulately (despite arriving 20 minutes late) and knowledgeably on an array of topics, though only addressing the relationship of sound and architecture peripherally at best. She herself acknowledged her lack of interest and expertise in the field and wondered how it came to be that she was the keynote speaker for such a symposium! In any case...
                Blur Building: The Blur building, which was constructed for the Swiss Expo of 2002 was an “attempt at creating pure atmosphere.” Diller and Scofidio were focused on creating a place where all visual and acoustic references were eliminated. This was achieved by pumping lake water through the “structure” of the building (essentially plumbing) and through high pressure spigots which created a fine mist. Despite the (what I think is magical in itself) “white noise” that was created by the spigots which spewed out the filtered lake watert, there was also a Christian Marclay sound piece (of mic’d dripping water) that was periodically perceptible within the “building”.
                Whitney Retrospective: Apparently distressed by the fact that they were asked to do a retrospective as if it was already time to sum up and look back on the work they had previously done (in 2003!), D&S instead conceived of an installation which simultaneously existed in the present and yet was increasing destroyed so as not to exist in the future. First a series of walls were erected to create areas of isolation, then, the mechanism with which they would be deconstructed was attached as robotic drills were mounted to tracks along the length of the walls. These drills would move from coordinate to coordinate and drill ½” holes through the wall structure leaving behind a hole until these holes became so dense that the wall could no longer support itself. Basically it became a 3 months drilling performance project where the wall competed for attention with the museum.
                  Alice Tully Hall: The title of the lecture comes from the acceptance that, from an acoustic standpoint, the original (pre renovation) Alice Tully Hall was a B+/A- hall which meant that is was a good multipurpose hall, but imperfect for all programs. Diller Scofidio & Renfro were tasked with improving the hall to make it a “great chamber music hall” which also worked for other programs while providing intimacy with the condition that they could not lose a single seat in the hall and were only able to change the interior cavity to a depth of 18” off the wall. Not only that, but they needed to reshape the walls in order redirect sound reflections to the center of the hall (at present they had the tendency to gather at the edges, a “gutterball” effect). At this point the analysis that dealt with the acoustical qualities of the space were left behind and the rest of the lecture recounted the EXTREMELY challenging process of developing wall panels that behaved appropriately acoustically and that had the quality of glowing from behind. The process was just SO involved and really a labor of love, determination, and might I add, willingness on the part of the client that I will refrain from repeating it here (not even sure if I could, it was quite a struggle really). It is amazing to me that DS&R were able to push this research and development intensive wall panel system through and ultimately install it in the final scheme particularly as it had to meet specific technical requirements (the necessary acoustic mass was achieved by laminating heat formed polyester resin with wood veneer as thin as paper), had to create the desired atmosphere (intimacy was achieved through lighting and material which were integrated into one system), and had to be constructed within an extremely short time-frame (16 months start to finish). Now that is was I call an accomplishment!

RECAP #3 - "The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

Yale School of Architecture
"The Sound of Architecture"
October 5, 2012 2pm - 4pm

From Telephones to Tabernacles

Following a yummy lunch at The Book Trader Cafe, just across the street from the school (BLT on sourdough is highly recommended), I returned for the afternoon session that was held in a lecture hall in the adjacent building. It was certainly nice to have a change in scenery, however the new venue was so cold that I spent every remaining lecture for the next two days bundled up in my sweater and coat! This was not a desirable scenario, but we all endured...

ARCHITECTURE MEDIATING SOUND

Graeme Lawson “Constructing Silences in the Ancient World: Identifying Acoustical Seclusion and Detachment in the Archeological Record”
               The overarching theme for the first lecture of the afternoon was actually quite interesting despite the somewhat awkward presentation. Lawson began with photos of several Neolithic pipes (In which it seemed Lawson’s main academic focus lies) which, though puzzling at first, served to illustrate the difficulty of resisting the desire to overlay contemporary notions of use and modes of occupation onto ancient artifacts. The pace soon picked up with the introduction of specific sites where the interaction with the human body was embedded in the architectural form of the ruin/artifact thereby aiding immensely in gaining an understanding of its original purpose. Lawson first presented some examples which were not as clear (organ loft at the Pieta church in Venice, whispering walls at St Michaels at Fulda) which then led to examples of more explicitly formed spaces including the trenches beneath the choir stalls at St Peter Mancroft in Norwich where jars were built into the walls to improve qualities of resonance. Ultimately, Lawson ended with the example of Greek “Exedra” were small semi circular structures generally made of stone with tall backs. These structures can be found in a variety of locations, but in most cases they were used to create spaces of enclosure within social spaces such as the audience of an amphitheater, in bathhouses and in parks or pretty much anywhere that encouraged conversation. What I especially appreciated in this presentation was the connection that was drawn between a desire for a particular acoustic condition and the evidence of how the physical structure achieved the required qualities of sound. In other words there was a direct correlation between the sound space produced and the architecture which shaped it.

Carlotta Daro "Sound Networks and the Public Sphere"
                Carlotta Daro, a diminutive woman, followed Graeme’s talk with a presentation of the development of the telephone and its physical presence within urban space. Daro was interested in addressing the “public sphere” in relation to the private “private sphere” through the medium of telecommunication. It was fascinating to begin to think about the impact of devices that allowed for the space that sound travels to be stretched from source to receptor. This disjunction of the voice from the body was particularly noticeable with invention of the radio and the ways in which technologies of this kind began to shape interpersonal dynamics. From my notes I cannot identify whether Daro had a position that she was taking relative to these topics, however I feel that it could possibly be my own fault as opposed to that of the lecturer’s. I can certainly understand the interest in this research particularly since it is a phenomenon that is continually evolving and continually shaping our own interactions and experiences.

Joel Sanders “ Making Sense: New Media and Social Space”
                I anxiously awaited the lecture by Joel Sanders since I had previously read of his work with Karen van Lengen on the Mix House proposal and the Sound Lounge project. His talk was well organized and featured a number of interesting ideas, though I was rather put off by the sequence of images at the end of the lecture showing a variety of promotional photographs of Apple products (iphones and ipad) as it seemed out of place and almost like an advertisement (Apple takes over the world! Well, Yale at least...). Sanders began with a presentation of a brief timeline of “technosonic architecture history” which included: the greek amphitheater, Chartres Cathedral, the impact of the printing press (the written word), the industrial revolution, the mid-century office, noise abatement, electro-acoustics, living room listening, PC ergonomics, and portable devices. Following in the theme of Daro’s lecture, this sequence was meant to illustrate the progression of changing relationships between inhabitants, space, and technology. For instance, the separation of sound and source which allowed sounds to be directed toward individual listeners rather than existing as a collective experience, the human disembodiment caused by PC ergonomics, or the lack of sensing bodies in public as currently distracted individuals wander the streets while focused on their portable mobile devices. Sanders hopes that the next steps in this progression will more explicitely attempt to re-awaken multisensory body engagement, and presented a few of his own projects in which he proposes ways for achieving this. The Mix House which was conceived of by Sanders in collaboration with Karen van Lengen and Ben Rubin, tries to re-empower the inhabitant and heighten acoustic awareness within a residential construction by integration moving portions of the building which are able to capture exterior sounds and re-project them into the interior space of the house at the touch of a screen by the user. I personally am not attracted to this type of solution because I feel as though they are only simulating a re-engagement with the exterior environment and are continuing to use technology as a mediator which creates more distance between the physical and the perceived. The Sound Lounge attempted to use distinct physical forms in conjunction with holoscopic speakers (audio spotlights or sound showers) to define zones of inhabitation within a lobby space. Apparently the final installed effect was not as successful as they had hoped, mostly due to the nature of the space as a transit space and passage. I am certainly interested in many similar ideas that Sanders brings up, such as the desire (and importance) of reawakening sensory awareness of place, and creating experiences that link the “eye and ear, the mind and body and the physical and virtual”. I am just not convinced by many of the multi-media immersive proposals that have been explored so far, and personally care more about reconnecting the inherently physical nature of spaces with the ambient conditions they create.

Joel Sanders

John Durham Peters “The Morman Tabernacle as Theologically Embedded Soundscape”
                To conclude the first half of the afternoon session, Peters presented a somewhat bizarre, yet intriguing, lecture on the role of the Morman Tabernacle in Salt Lake City, Utah. Peters explained that the tabernacle acts as an “acoustically sensitive voice box” which emanates the word of God. This is a fitting description, as the acoustics of this space are world famous. The roof, roughly shaped as an ellipse, was built by a bridge builder entirely of wood and subsequently acts as an acoustic sounding board. The adjacent temple with its towering, solid stone structure, orthogonal organization and emphasis on silence, can be understood as the “male” counterpart to the “female” tabernacle, which in contrast, is defined by its rounded wooden roof and organic materials (rawhide binding, horsehair insulation), but mostly as a structure to be filled with sound. The tension produced by this juxtaposition is interesting in itself and I wish that Peters had continued with more of an analysis in this vein. Instead, he started talking about the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, and randomly introduced the notion that the choir was the “whitest” homogeneous collective group (in the country? in the world?). How is this relevant? The audience nervously started shifting in their seats as Peters continued pursuing this train of thought (accompanied by several slides showing performances with several African American featured artists). Regardless of the way the lecture ended, the bulk of the talk was illuminating and well researched, and I enjoyed the analysis of such an iconic acoustic structure.

The next recap will cover the last afternoon session of the first full day of the symposium and the keynote lecture by Liz Diller.  Check back in a few days for the post!
 

RECAP #2 - "The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

Yale School of Architecture
"The Sound of Architecture"
October 5, 2012 11:00am - 1pm

Puck, Wagner, and the Hollywood Bowl

I’m not sure whether it was my intensifying hunger and/or my craving for a hot caffeinated beverage and/or the thick foreign accents of the next speakers, but I was not as alert during the following presentations and my recaps may suffer as a result...

ON STAGE

Beat Wyss “Simultaneity and Succession: The Stuff of Dreams on Stage”
                Wyss introduced his talk as the joining together of Shakespeare and Palladio via the theater in Vicenza, Italy. If you ask me how in fact he did this, I would be at a loss to say specifically. It was my impression that he used stage direction from the Shakespeare play “Midsummer Night’s Dream” overlaid with images of Palladio’s Teatro Olimpico in Vicenza to illustrate the context for which the “Dream” was created. Overall, it felt as though Wyss only got through half of the intended lecture and was therefore unable to close the loop he had first proposed. How this talk addressed the over arching theme of “sound and architecture” I am still not sure.

Teatro Olimpico

Dorothea Baumann “Gottfried Semper, Richard Wagner, and the Changing Acoustic Conditions for Music Theater in the 19th Century”
               I quite enjoyed Baumann’s talk which covered a wide range of evolving theater structures referring back to the first inspirational trip Gottfried Semper took to Pompeii in the 1830’s. She tracked the influence of the Pompeian theaters from the Sydenham Crystal Palace antique theater reconstruction through several iterations of temporary German structures originally conceived of as provisional theaters for a limited number of debut performances. At this point Wagner appears on the stage (hehe) as he adapts an unrealized project by Semper for a Munich opera house, and supervises its construction in Bayreuth, Germany. This theater incorporates parallel side walls, semi-circular seating, a second proscenium, and a sunken orchestra pit partially hidden beneath the stage itself (an important development in the evolution of theater design). At this point Baumann presented a series of slides which addressed basics of sound behavior within theater spaces. She cited the influential acoustician Leo Beranek and noted the importance of integrated signal reception consisting of the direct signal, wall reflections, ceiling reflections and stage reflections. Her blending of historical information, technical details, and the human characters of Semper and Wagner, made for a rich and well rounded lecture on the topic.

Theaters at Pompeii

Bayreuth Festspielhaus

Craig Hodgetts “The Ear, the Eye, and the Space”
               At this point it was refreshing to have an architect present some realized work, as it became increasingly clear that the majority of speakers did not come from an architectural background and which was, in my opinion, ultimately detrimental to the symposium as a whole. In any case, Hodgetts was straightforward and to the point, walking the audience through three full projects and quickly skimming over a fourth. Hodgetts began with his work on the Grauman’s Egyptian Theater for American Cinematheque, originally built in 1922 and restored and renovated multiple times before Hodgetts became involved. The task was to renovate the theater overall, preserving the original decor and atmosphere of the space while simultaneously improving upon the acoustics for contemporary movie viewing (which requires a very dry/absorptive environment). The solution included a series of moving acoustical panels which were retracted as the audience filed in, but which extended into place at the start of a film. The next project presented was The Wild Beast Music Pavilion at CalArts. The pavilion is a flexible space which is required to accommodate multiple programs (though not necessarily simultaneously) including a recital hall, rehearsal room, outdoor hall, classroom etc. Basically the structure has to perform well acoustically while taking into account a variety of source locations and sizes. Quite a challenge! Dynamic and mechanical structures were once again incorporated into the scheme which included a series of clerestory windows controlled with actuators to open and close according to the type of program being performed. The renovation of the Hollywood Bowl was the last project thoroughly presented. Hodgetts began with a brief history of the Bowl and its evolution (began as a natural amphitheater, then the addition of orchestra shells all the way to Frank Gehry’s sonotube environment). In 1998 Hodgetts + Fung were asked to update the site which resulted in the enlargement of the shell and the incorporation of computer controlled acoustic louvers which respond specifically to the atmospheric conditions in addition to performance parameters. One of the most interesting aspects of this strategy is that the Hollywood Bowl now possesses a database of information which tracks conditions and allows for the optimization of the louvers. To me, this kind of responsive and informed architecture has the potential to be a valuable step in the evolution of buildings.   

RECAP #1 - "The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

Yale School of Architecture

"The Sound of Architecture"

October 5, 2012  9:00am - 11:00am

“One man’s noise is another man’s signal.” - Barry Blesser

On Friday at 8:30am I pulled into the parking garage on York St. in New Haven and headed over to the Yale School of Architecture for the morning session of the symposium entitled, “The Sound of Architecture.” Though I missed the introductory lecture by Brigitte Shim from the night before, the main bulk of the talks were held on Friday and Saturday to a consistent, though relatively modest, audience often made up of other panelists and a few devoted attendees (like myself). I was surprised by this fact as I was anticipating a really large crowd, which only appeared on the Thursday evening keynote lecture given by Liz Diller of Diller Scofidio + Renfro.

The morning portion was presented in the basement auditorium in the Paul Rudolph building on campus and kicked off with the theme “Listening to Architecture”. And so the recap begins:

LISTENING TO ARCHITECTURE

Barry Blesser and Linda-Ruth Salter “Spatial Design Changes the Eventscape”
               Barry Blesser, a short man with a graying beard and suspenders, structured his talk around the position that the “language of aural architecture” is one that is, as yet, unformed and in need of extensive development. His presentation of several terms including: aural mass, acoustic horizon, localization, enveloping reverb, and perceived aural distance, aimed to illustrate that a framework for meaningful discussion of the relations between the behavior of sound and the built environment is necessary and must be addressed. Blesser also stated that while auralization is underdeveloped in our culture it can be improved with formal ear training (similar to that of musicians) as nobody is born with a refined sensory awareness of sound. He was adamant that in order to change the lack of sensitivity to aural environments in the design field, ear training must be introduced into architecture schools. I certainly agree with the need to integrate the auditory dimension into the education of architects who shape the built environment and influence our ways of occupying spaces, however, I can see that is it quite an obstacle particularly as there are currently few programs which even address architectural acoustics in the context of their core courses (this differs from the generally required courses on daylighting strategies). Blesser continued by describing the unique characteristics of sound, for instance: that it flows around obstacles and in openings, that it reveals the interior of objects, and that it is never static, but most importantly (to me anyway), that there is no sound without ACTION. This fact is one that is crucial in order the understand the inherent complexity and unpredictable nature of sound and its perpetual interaction with architectural spaces, namely, that architecture is activated by its occupants and subsequently by the sonic environment produced by those activities. Within the next several slides of bulleted points (quite a dry visual presentation actually, consisting only of text, ugh) I honed in on another concept: that the ears control the direction of visual focus...the ears tell the eyes where to look. While this might seem obvious, I found that the more I thought about it, the more interesting this idea was to me. In a culture that is generally accepted to be dominated by the visual sense, we still depend heavily on the preliminary processing of signals gathered by the ears in order to filter and direct that which is taken in through the eyes. All in all, I was happy to have had the opportunity to hear Blesser speak, as I feel that he has a strong stance and a unique perspective (though not a designer) and through his book “Spaces Speak, Are you Listening” has become an invaluable resource to those of us delving into the study of architecture and its relationship with the sound that is both shaped by it and animates it.

Peter Szendy “Sounding Out”
               My notes for the beginning of Szendy’s lecture include a quote by Adolf Loos (“You can fool the souls of people, but not the souls of material.”) and the observation that for Franz Kafka, a door can have an almost bodily sound (see “Great Noise” by Kafka, 1911). My notes, fragmented as they are, render me unable to reconstruct the thread that tied these together (this will happen from time to time) so I will move on. Szendy soon peaked my interest with mention of “mediate auscultation,” a term first introduced by René-Théophile-Hyacinthe Laënnec. “Mediate auscultation” refers to the listening to the internal sounds of the body using a stethoscope. Laënnec was concerned with diseases of the chest, and by observing and appropriating the ability of a wooden beam to transport the sound of a pin scratching its surface on one end all the way to the other, invented the stethoscope. This new mode of listening (previously “immediate auscultation” required that the physician put their ear directly on the patient's’ body), allowed for the effective and less intrusive auditory penetration of the “thickness of bodies and its constituent elements”. In particular, auscultation was sensitive to the spacing of sounds and effective in discriminating where they occur. This type of analytical listening, or “sounding out” became evident as the theme of the lecture (hence its title) which continued with an engaging sequence that moved to comics (Daredevil’s radar) via military devices for listening, and ended by touching upon the echo-tectonics discussed by Athanasius Kircher, and a brief mention of the cave in Syracuse, Italy, known as the Ear of Dionysus famous for its acoustic properties. Szendy concluded by stating that “space is not a neutral background for hearing” and indeed it is not. Space is actively modulating and augmenting the aural environment that we perceive and as such must be considered as a mediator as profoundly important as the stethoscope.

Raj Patel and Alban Bassuet “Acoustics, Architecture, and Music: “Understanding the Past and Present, Shaping the Future”
                Patel and Bassuet, both acousticians at Arup, took us on a whirlwind introduction of the company’s work, quickly moving through images ranging from opera houses (Sydney Opera House, Oslo Opera House) to spatial installations (Serpentine Pavilions, Park Avenue Armory). They then stepped back in time with an image of the cave paintings at Lascaux illustrating that the paintings were specifically placed within the cave to coincide with the sound character of the animals depicted. They then quickly (it always felt “quick” because they both talked so fast!) moved from Tibetan stupas and the pyramids of Chichen Itza to the rooms for which European composers such as Hayden specifically wrote for. I felt as though all of this information had the potential to develop into several separate and rich lectures, however, they pressed on with a presentation of the ways in which the acoustic signature for designed spaces could be visualized. Here they stepped into the present day, discussing the current desire for immersive and multi-sensory experiences and the challenges it poses in terms of technical performance in conjunction with the human experience (illustrated with images of Gehry's Disney Concert Hall in LA, New World Symphony Concert hall in Miami Beach and current projects including the Constellation Center in Cambridge, MA and the Issue Project Room in Brooklyn). To wrap up, Bassuet and Patel spoke about the high-tech Arup Sound Lab, where, through a process of auralization, clients can listen to the “sound environment” of their proposed architecture acting, in a way, like an aural rendering of the site. The “Be Open Sound Portal”, recently seen on ArchDaily here, employs the same technique in order to allow visitors to experience the acoustics of a range of spaces (ie. Sydney Opera House) simply by sitting within their highly engineered pavilion in Trafalgar Square. Somehow I am not so excited by the prospect of divorcing the sound environment of spaces from the very architectures that define them, but that just might be me...
 
Brian Kane “Acousmatic Phantasmagoria”
                Kane presented a well organized talk which argued the interrelatedness of acousmatic phantasmagoria, transcendence, and techne. He laid out several points through which he developed this position, beginning with the definition of an acousmatic sound which is a sound one hears without seeing the source. Kane proceeded with examples including the obscured orchestra pits of mid-19th century German concert halls (an architectural form which came up in more than one presentation over the course of the symposium) as well as the strategically placed choir lofts (with obscuring grills) near the frescoed ceiling at La Chiesa Santi Domenico e Sisto. In this case, the choir loft location, with visual obstruction but acoustic transparency, succeeded in creating the illusion of heavenly voices emanating from the depicted heavens. These examples, Kane argues, illustrate the desire for transcendence, in particular with regards to musical performances, which could effectively be achieved through the splitting of the visual and aural using methods of physical obstruction and spatial placement.

Overall, the initial morning session was intellectually stimulating and quite engaging. I found myself eagerly awaiting the second half of the session, “On Stage,” though I became distractingly hungry early on which was most certainly detrimental to my note-taking and mental focus!
 

notes

Yosa Buson - poet

                 The sound of a bell

struck off center

               vanishes in haze.

"The Sound of Architecture" at Yale School of Architecture

I'm looking forward to attending this symposium at Yale University School of Architecture in a few weeks! Stay tuned for my observations/comments/responses...
 

SYMPOSIUM: “THE SOUND OF ARCHITECTURE”

Thursday–Saturday, October 4–6, 2012

Yale School of Architecture

Architecture is not tone deaf: It can create silent places and eddies of noise, deeply affecting our experience and facilitating or frustrating communication. Buildings have long been thought of in visual and practical terms, leaving their aural dimension largely unconsidered. Today, the ways we listen in built spaces have been transformed by developments in media, music, and art. New design tools are helping architects shape the soundscapes of their buildings, while new audio technologies afford access to previously undetected sonic environments.

This symposium, convened by Kurt W. Forster and Joseph Clarke, will draw on a variety of disciplinary expertise in its quest for an understanding of architecture as an auditory environment. Leading scholars from fields as diverse as archeology, media studies, musicology, philosophy, and the history of technology will converge at the Yale School of Architecture to discuss critical questions alongside major architects, acoustical engineers, composers, and artists. The Sound of Architecture aims to stake out a new set of questions for ongoing scholarly inquiry and to reaffirm architecture as a place of convergence among old and emerging disciplines.

website: http://www.architecture.yale.edu/drupal/events/symposia 
Free registration: http://www.architecture.yale.edu/dmonline/database/symposium/_symposium_registration_add.php.

Thursday, Oct 4

6:30 pm Welcome
    Yale School of Architecture Dean Robert A. M. Stern
Overture
    Kurt W. Forster (School of Architecture, Yale University)
Lecture: “Ways of Seeing Sound: The Integral House”
    Brigitte Shim (Shim-Sutcliffe, Toronto)

8:30 pm Reception
 
Friday, Oct 5

9:00 am Session 1: Listening to Architecture
The audibility of space is introduced and key questions are raised about its phenomenological manifestations, opening up the intertwined histories of architecture and listening.  Moderator: Mark Jarzombek (Department of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

“Spatial Design Changes the Eventscape”
    Barry Blesser and Linda-Ruth Salter (Blesser Associates, Belmont, Massachusetts)
“Sounding Out”
    Peter Szendy (Département de Philosophie, Université Paris Ouest)
“Acoustics, Architecture, and Music: Understanding the Past and Present, Shaping the Future”
    Raj Patel and Alban Bassuet (Arup Acoustics, New York)
“Acousmatic Phantasmagoria”
    Brian Kane (Department of Music, Yale University)

11:00 am Break
11:15 am Session 2: Sound on Stage
Architecture’s channeling of social forces through aural and visual experience is often founded on paradigms of musical and dramatic performance.  Moderator: Ariane Lourie Harrison (School of Architecture, Yale University)

“Simultaneity and Succession: The Stuff of Dreams on Stage”
    Beat Wyss (Staatliche Hochschule für Gestaltung, Karlsruhe, Germany)
“Gottfried Semper, Richard Wagner, and the Changing Acoustic Conditions for Music Theater in the Nineteenth Century”
    Dorothea Baumann (Musikwissenschaftliches Institut, Universität Zurich)
“The Ear, the Eye and the Space”
    Craig Hodgetts (Hodgetts Plus Fung Design and Architecture, Culver City, California)

1:00 pm Lunch Break

2:00 pm Session 3: Architecture Mediating Sound
When architecture assumes a form of media technology, the functions of aural communication and isolation are registered in a culture of sonic controls.  Moderator: Mario Carpo (School of Architecture, Yale University)

“Constructing Silences in the Ancient World: Identifying Acoustical Seclusion and Detachment in the Archaeological Record”
    Graeme Lawson (McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge)
“Sound Networks and the Public Sphere”
    Carlotta Darò (Ecole nationale superieure d'architecture Paris Malaquais)
“Making Sense: New Media and Social Space”
    Joel Sanders (Joel Sanders Architect, New York)
“The Mormon Tabernacle as Theologically Embedded Soundspace”
    John Durham Peters (Department of Communication Studies, University of Iowa)

4:00 pm Break

4:15 pm Session 4: Representing Acoustic Environments
While sound is often a defining characteristic of space, its representation notoriously defies the limits of traditional architectural discourse. Is there a notion of ambient sound and what does it represent?  Moderator: Jack Vees (School of Music, Yale University)

Projection: “Alcatraz”
    Ingram Marshall (School of Music, Yale University)
“Sampling Space: A Simple Theory of Convolution Reverb”
    Jonathan Sterne (Department of Art History and Communication Studies, McGill University)
“Constructing an Acoustic History of Vancouver on Film”
    Randolph Jordan (Department of Cinema Studies, Simon Fraser University)

6:15 pm Break

6:30 pm Lecture: “B+/A-”
Elizabeth Diller (Diller Scofidio + Renfro, New York)

7:45 pm Reception

Saturday, Oct 6
9:00 am Session 5: Civic Noise
The economist Jacques Attali wrote that “any organization of sounds is [...] a tool for the creation or consolidation of a community.” What powers do sounds project and how do they create a definable auratic sphere? How does sound draw together a collective of listeners in space and articulate social fault lines in the city?  Moderator: William Rankin (Department of History, Yale University)

“On the Aural Creation of Urban Communities in Early Modern Italy”
    Niall Atkinson (Department of Art History, University of Chicago)
“The Architecture of Victorian Oratorio”
    Timothy Barringer (Department of the History of Art, Yale University)
“Noise and Public Privacy in the Stethoscopic Era”
    John Picker (Literature Section, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
“Listening to Carchitecture”
    J. D. Connor (Department of the History of Art, Yale University)

11:00 am Roundtable Discussion: Designing Architectural Soundscapes
Moderator: Michelle Addington (School of Architecture, Yale University)

Alban Bassuet (Arup Acoustics, New York)
Craig Hodgetts (Hodgetts Plus Fung Design and Architecture, Culver City)
Karen van Lengen (School of Architecture, University of Virginia)
Raj Patel (Arup Acoustics, New York)
Joel Sanders (Joel Sanders Architect, New York)

12:30 pm Lunch Break

1:30 pm Session 6: Acoustic Space
How do acoustic phenomena “resonate” through the character of the spatial environment? This session considers how sound affects the social and aesthetic qualities of space itself.  Moderator: Kurt W. Forster (School of Architecture, Yale University)

“Infinite and Intimate Space”
    Sabine von Fischer (Institute for the History and Theory of Architecture, ETH Zürich)
“Acoustic Shadows: Macbeth and the Civil War, Washington, D.C., October 17, 1863”
    Alexander Nemerov (Department of Art & Art History, Stanford University)
“Biology, Environment and Sound: Jakob von Uexküll Revisited”
    Veit Erlmann (School of Music, University of Texas at Austin)
“Shared Space”
    Brandon LaBelle (Artist, Berlin)

3:30 pm Coda
Joseph Clarke (School of Architecture, Yale University)

4:00 pm Closing Reception