Master's thesis of Design: Listening for design: urban sonic experience and the sonic identity model

LISTENING FOR DESIGN: URBAN SONIC EXPERIENCE AND THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL

A p r o j e c t s u b m i t t e d i n f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e d e g r e e o f M a s t e r o f D e s i g n

S O P H I E G L E E S O N

B a c h e l o r o f M u s i c Te c h n o l o g y, Q u e e n s l a n d C o n s e r v a t o r i u m G r i f f i t h U n i v e r s i t y

S C H O O L O F D E S I G N

C O L L E G E O F D E S I G N A N D S O C I A L C O N T E X T

R M I T U N I V E R S I T Y

S E P T E M B E R 2 0 2 0

D E C L A R A T I O N

I certify that except where due acknowledgement has been made, the work is that of the author alone; the work has not been submitted previously, in whole or in part, to qualify for any other academic award; the content of the project is the result of work which has been carried out since the oﬃcial commencement date of the approved research program; any editorial work, paid or unpaid, carried out by a third party is acknowledged; and, ethics procedures and guidelines have been followed.

I acknowledge the support I have received for my research through the provision of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Sophie Gleeson, 30 September 2020.

i i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I respectfully acknowledge the Woi wurrung and Boon wurrung language groups of the eastern Kulin Nations as the Traditional Owners of the land I have worked and lived on during my candidature. I acknowledge and pay my respects to the owners and traditional custodians of this land, the Wurundjeri people, and to their Elders, past, present and emerging. Sovereignty has never been ceded.

Always was, always will be Aboriginal Land.

I thank my supervisors, Lawrence Harvey and Lisa Dethridge, for all their time and expertise they have shared with me.

To Lawrence Harvey, for your continued mentorship and support over the years, without which I wouldn’t be working in this ﬁeld.

To Lisa Dethridge, without whom this dissertation would be twice as long and half as good.

I thank my colleagues and fellow candidates, whom I have learned a great deal from.

To my SIAL Sound Studios colleagues Simon Maisch, Jeﬀ Hannam, Lisa Bartolomei and Gill Levers.

To my HDR cohort Bec Fary, Adrian Lucas-Healey, Mariana Bertelli Pagotto, Bob Jarvis, Giorgia Pisano, Brendan Harwood and Ben Landau.

My gratitude also goes to my family, friends and my partner.

To my parents Jennifer and Gary Gleeson and sisters Rachel and Nikita, for your love and support.

To my beloved friends, Lauren Barina, Hannah Barnes, Bec Fary, Oliver Reeson, Will Muhleisen, April Nougher-Dayhew, Xan Coppinger, and Jake Cleland, Paddy Bridges and the Gold Street gang.

To Jack Vening, for many things but mostly for always listening.

i i i

C O N T E N T S

DECLARATION ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

CONTENTS iv

MEDIA vii

ABSTRACT 1

INTRODUCTION 2

1.1 DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH 5

1.2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 6

1.3 METHODOLOGY 8

1.4 PRACTICE BACKGROUND 11

1.5 RATIONALE 12

DOMAIN REVIEW: SOUND STUDIES & URBAN SONIC DESIGN 13

2.1 SOUND STUDIES 14

2.2 URBAN SONIC DESIGN

2.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE MANAGEMENT 2.2.2 SOUNDSCAPE STUDIES 2.2.3 URBAN SOUNDSCAPE DESIGN 2.2.4 SONIC EXPERIENCE STUDIES 17 19 21 24 27

2.3 CHALLENGES FACING PRACTITIONERS IN URBAN SONIC DESIGN 31

CONCLUSION 34

THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL: AN URBAN SONIC DESIGN APPROACH 35

i v

3.1 OVERVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY 3.1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE WORK 3.1.2 DEFINING “SONIC IDENTITY” 3.1.3 LIMITATIONS TO STUDYING & UNDERSTANDING THE MODEL 36 36 37 38

3.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY

3.2.1 THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL AS A DESCRIPTIVE TOOL 3.2.2 THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL AS AN OPERATIVE TOOL 39 39 41

3.3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES 43

3.4 AIMS 45

3.5 METHODS FOR DATA COLLECTION

3.5.1 SONIC MIND MAPS 3.5.2 PHONO-REPUTABLE INQUIRIES 3.5.3 RE-ACTIVATED LISTENING INTERVIEWS 46 46 48 48

3.6 CONCEPTUAL TOOLS FOR ANALYSIS

3.6.1 CVS MODEL 3.6.2 SONIC COMPOSITION TOOL 3.6.3 SONIC EFFECTS 3.6.4 EMP MODEL & THE REPERTOIRE OF QUALITATIVE CRITERIA 49 49 49 51 54

3.7 STRUCTURE 57

CONCLUSION 59

THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL: PRACTITIONER APPLICATION 60

4.1 OVERVIEW OF MODEL APPLICATION

4.1.1 BARRIO & CARLES’ MINOR APPLICATION OF THE MODEL 4.1.2 HELLSTRÖM’S MINOR APPLICATION OF THE MODEL 4.1.3 PAQUETTE’S MAJOR APPLICATION OF THE MODEL 4.1.4 VOGIATZIS & RÉMY’S MINOR APPLICATION OF THE MODEL 4.1.5 KARAPOSTOLI & VOTSI’S MINOR APPLICATION OF THE MODEL 61 63 64 64 65 65

4.2 METHODS FOR DATA COLLECTION APPLIED IN CASE STUDIES

4.2.1 SONIC MIND MAPS 4.2.2 PHONO-REPUTABLE INQUIRIES 4.2.3 RE-ACTIVATED LISTENING INTERVIEWS 66 66 67 68

4.3 CONCEPTUAL TOOLS FOR ANALYSIS APPLIED IN CASE STUDIES

4.3.1 CVS MODEL 4.3.2 SONIC COMPOSITION TOOL 4.3.3 SONIC EFFECTS 4.3.4 EMP MODEL & THE REPERTOIRE OF QUALITATIVE CRITERIA 69 69 70 71 72

4.4 REPORTED USEFULNESS OF THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL

4.4.1 REPORTED USEFULNESS OF MODEL’S METHODS AND CONCEPTS 4.4.2 REPORTED USEFULNESS OF OVERALL MODEL 73 73 74

CONCLUSION 76

SITE INVESTIGATION PROJECT 77

5.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW

5.1.1 PROJECT SITE 1: THE COUCH STUDY SPACE 5.1.2 PROJECT SITE 2: UNIVERSITY LAWN 78 80 82

5.2 INTERPRETATION & ADAPTATION OF THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL

5.2.1 ADAPTATION OF SONIC MIND MAP METHOD 5.2.2 ADAPTATION OF SONIC COMPOSITION TOOL 5.2.4 ADAPTATION OF SONIC EFFECTS TOOL 84 88 89 89

5.3 INVESTIGATION OF THE PROJECT SITES

5.3.1 SONIC ENVIRONMENT DOCUMENTATION 5.4.2 SONIC ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 5.4.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE FINDINGS 90 91 96 99

5.4 PROJECT SITES: FINDINGS

5.4.1 THE SONIC ENVIRONMENT OF THE COUCH STUDY SPACE 5.4.2 THE SONIC ENVIRONMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY LAWN 101 101 106

CONCLUSION 112

CONCLUSIONS & FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS 113

6.1 CONCLUSIONS 113

6.2 FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS 116

REFERENCES 118

APPENDICES 126

APPENDIX 1: INTERVIEW WITH PASCAL AMPHOUX 126

APPENDIX 2: LOCAL NON-WESTERN SOUND AND ENVIRONMENT PRACTICE 136

APPENDIX 3: THE “SONIC WORLD” & THE EMP MODEL 140

APPENDIX 4: PROJECT WORK INVENTORY 144

APPENDIX 5: SITE INVESTIGATION PROJECT SONIC MAPS 145

v i

APPENDIX 6: RESEARCH ETHICS APPROVAL 150

M

E

D

I

A

FIGURES

Figure 1: An Early-stage Design Process for Urban Sonic Design 4

Figure 2: Key Stages of the Site investigation Project 6

Figure 3: Positioning of Research Project in Sound Studies & Urban Sonic Design 17

Figure 4: Key Domain Attitudes & Approaches to the Sonic Environment 18

Figure 5: “Soundscape” Term Use in Sample of Acoustics Journals, 1993-2019 26

Figure 6: Diagram of Pascal Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model 42

Figure 7: The “Sonic World” and the EMP Model 56

Figure 8: Practitioner Application of the Sonic Identity Model in English, 1993-2019 62

Figure 9: Timeline of the Site Investigation Project 78

Figure 10: Workﬂow of the Site Investigation Project 79

Figure 11: Layout of the Couch Study Space Project Site 80

Figure 12: Layout of the University Lawn Project Site 82

Figure 13: Timeline of Model Interpretation & Adaptation 84

Figure 14: Investigation of the Project Sites Over Time 90

TABLES

Table 1: Sonic Composition Tool 50

Table 2: Sonic Effects Tool 52

Table 3: EMP Model 54

Table 4: Practitioner Application of Sonic Identity Model Methods & Concepts 63

Table 5: Application of Sonic Mind Maps Method in Case Studies 66

Table 6: Application of Phono-reputable Inquiries Method in Case Studies 67

Table 7: Application of Re-activated Listening Interviews Method in Case Studies 68

Table 8: Application of CVS Model in Case Studies 69

Table 9: Application of Sonic Composition Conceptual Tool in Case Studies 70

Table 10: Application of Sonic Effect Conceptual Tool in Case Studies 71

Table 11: Application of EMP Model in Case Studies 72

Table 12: Key Stages of the Site Investigation Project 78

Table 13: Use of Sonic Identity Model Methods & Concepts 85

Table 14: Sonic Identity Model Versus Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation 86

v i i

Table 15: Adaptation of Sonic Mind Map Method 88

Table 16: Adaptation of Sonic Composition Tool 89

Table 17: Adaptation of Sonic Effect Conceptual Tool 89

Table 18: Timeline of Documentation of Project Sites 91

IMAGES

Image 1: the Couch Study Space in Pictures 81

Image 2: the University Lawn in Pictures 83

Image 3: Example Time-based In-situ Sonic Mind Map, University Lawn 93

Image 4: Example Free-form In-situ Sonic Mind Map, Couch Study Space 94

Image 5: Example Time-based In-situ Sonic Mind Map Timeline, University Lawn 97

Image 6: Composite Sonic Composition Map, Couch Study Space 102

v i i i

Image 7: Composite Sonic Composition Map, University Lawn 107

L I S T E N I N G

F O R

D E S I G N :

U R B A N

S O N I C

E X P E R I E N C E

A N D

T H E

S O N I C

I D E N T I T Y

M O D E L

A B S T R A C T

In the last 10 years interest and activity in urban sonic design has expanded. The way we listen to,

think about and understand sound determines the way we value, manage and design with it.

However practitioners in the area would beneﬁt from detailed forms of site documentation and

analysis that go beyond physical sound measurement.

This Masters explores the use of the Sonic Identity Model developed by Pascal Amphoux of

CRESSON (the Centre for Research on Sonic Space and Urban Environment) in the early stages of

urban sonic design.

In this dissertation I provide a high-level overview of urban sonic design as a sub-domain of sound

studies. I review established approaches and methods available to designers in environmental noise

management, soundscape studies, urban soundscape design and sonic experience studies, and

outline their diﬀerences and similarities. I investigate one urban sonic design approach in detail: the

Sonic Identity Model. I comprehensively explain the methodology, examine ﬁve practitioner uses of

the Model and evaluate its reported usefulness.

I then demonstrate the Model’s use as a tool for understanding indoor and outdoor urban sonic

environments from my subjective listening perspective. Through research-led creative practice I

adapt and apply the Sonic Identity Model for use in the early stages of urban sonic design. Through

three site studies I iteratively document two urban spaces, analyse the results and audio record the

sites. I present high-level descriptive ﬁndings on my listening experience of each sonic environment.

This ﬁeld work is further informed by my attendance at workshops at CRESSON and interviews with

its key researchers.

The research project concludes with three outputs: a comprehensive explanation of the Sonic

Identity Model; my adaptation of the Sonic Identity Model as the Sonic Identity Practitioner

Adaptation; and the documentation, analysis and description of the sonic environments of each

project site. This project is applicable for practitioners in sound and environment practices including

urban design, soundscape studies, urban soundscape design and environmental noise

management.

1 C H A P T E R

IN TRODUCTION

Sonic phenomena only make sense if they are related to the concrete conditions of their appearance, to the built spaces and structures in which they may be heard, to the perceptive interpretations and conﬁgurations to which they lend themselves, to the social and practical uses which animate them — Jean-François Augoyard. 1

The urban sonic environment is made up of dynamic and expressive ordinary sonic phenomena. It is

understood not only through its physical qualities, but also through its reception — by the ways in

which we perceive, process, value and remember sounds; by the ways we move through the sonic

environment; and through how we choose to listen, or not listen.

Sound is a complex phenomenon that reveals its complexity the longer you attune to it. For a

practitioner seeking to approach these complexities, it raises questions — how can we understand

these dimensions of the sonic environment? How can we design with them?

Sound studies is an interdisciplinary area of practice encompassing a range of perspectives and

approaches for understanding and designing with sound. The ﬁelds of soundscape studies, urban

soundscape design, sonic experience studies and environmental noise management in particular

Jean-François Augoyard, “Contribution à une théorie générale de l’expérience sonore : le concept

d’eﬀet sonore,” Revue de Musicothérapie 9, no. 3 (1989): 18-36, cited in Jean-Paul Thibaud, “Listening to Urban Sounds,” Urbanistica, Istituto nazionale di urbanistica, no. 153 (2014): 122, https://hal.archives- ouvertes.fr/hal-01560163.

“Sonic Experience Studies” is a term used here to describe the unique work of CRESSON, the

Centre for Research on Sonic Space and Urban Environment, based in Grenoble, France.

oﬀer approaches for handling the sonic environment that may be categorised as oﬀensive,

defensive and creative. However, in professional practice the urban sonic environment is

predominantly understood and managed by acousticians through defensive environmental noise

management and traditional acoustic design approaches. This defensive approach, while valuable in

its own right, does not take into account the many other dimensions of sound, and the sonic

experiences of those in the environment — that is, the listeners.

A negative attitude to noise has gradually supplanted an approach that paid attention to the sound culture of city-dwellers. Little by little this process has destroyed the intuitive links that developers created between the design of urban spaces and the framework in which we listen — Olivier Balaÿ. 4

For a sonic design practitioner to operate in this area, it is important to understand the sonic

environment in all its complexity; the way we listen to, think about and understand sound

determines the way we value, manage and design with it. However, very few established practical

tools and frameworks exist for understanding an environment past acoustic measurement. The

Sonic Identity Model, developed by Pascal Amphoux of CRESSON (the Centre for Research on

Sonic Space and Urban Environment), investigates the subjective sonic qualities of a city. The

interdisciplinary Model outlines a framework for analysing local inhabitant listener experiences. To

use the Model requires a substantial research team with a strong understanding of the Model’s

family of methods and conceptual tools, and the participation of local inhabitants, city experts,

newcomers, and persons with specialist knowledge of the sonic environment. In other words, it

requires a large amount of researchers, participants, resources and time.

How then may an individual practitioner use the Sonic Identity Model to understand subjective and

expressive dimensions of sonic environments? This research project explores the use of the Sonic

Identity Model in the early stages of urban sonic design. Through research-led creative practice I

use the Model as a tool for understanding the sonic environments of two urban spaces from my

Björn Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities: a Presentation of the Work Conducted by the Swiss-French Researcher Pascal Amphoux,” in Soundscape Studies and Methods, ed. Helmi Järviluoma and Gregg Wagstaﬀ (Helsinki: The Finish Society for Ethnomusicology, 2002), 77-78.

Olivier Balaÿ, “Discrete Mapping of Urban Soundscapes,” trans. Harry Forster, Soundscape 4, no. 1

(Spring/Summer 2004): 13.

singular, subjective listening perspective.

Site documentation

Urban soundscape design

Site analysis

Environmental noise management

Description of the ﬁndings

Design

Acoustic ecology

Sonic experience studies

Sound art

…

Early-stage design process

Urban sonic design fields and approaches

Figure 1: An Early-stage Design Process for Urban Sonic Design

This diagram outlines a design process for urban sonic design. The steps outlined in the early-stage design process are the focus of this research project.

I position this project in the early stages of the design process, focusing on how I may understand

complex urban sonic environments prior to changing them. The early-stage design process is

understood here to encompass the documentation, analysis and description of the sonic

environment, and is positioned as the precursor to sonic design.

The term “design” is central to this dissertation. Design is understood here as “a reﬂective

conversation with the situation,” where “the situation talks back” and the designer responds. For

“the situation” — in this context the sonic environment — to talk back, the designer has to listen.

Listening is the primary mode of investigation in this project, and a fundamental tool for any sonic

designer when exploring sound and space. In this Master of Design project I use listening to pursue

a deeper understanding of and relationship with the urban sonic environment. I take on the role of

“the listener,” studying my own sonic experience and accordingly excluding that of other listeners. I

do not examine diverse listening experiences outside my own, which is critical to the larger design

process. The role of “the listener” lies outside the scope of the project and will be considered in

Donald Schön, The Reﬂective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Practice (London: Basic

Books, 1983), 76.

Schön, The Reﬂective Practitioner, 131-132.

Björn Hellström, Noise Design: Architectural Modelling and the Aesthetics of Urban Acoustic Space

(Göteborg: Bo Ejeby Forlag, 2003), 37.

future research and Model application.

1.1 D ES CRIPTION OF RESEARCH

The project takes a research-led approach to creative practice. This approach is fundamental for

studying and applying a complex methodology in practice and will drive the production of the

practical project outputs. Research will be focused on understanding three topics: the domain of

sound studies and the sub-domain of urban sonic design; key urban sonic design ﬁelds and their

established attitudes, approaches, methods and challenges; and the Sonic Identity Model, the

primary theory under investigation.

As a practitioner coming to the ﬁeld of sound studies, it is important to research and understand the

broad domain so that I may position myself within it. Through research, including an international

ﬁeld trip to attend the Winter School Workshop conference at CRESSON, I will develop my

understanding of urban sonic design ﬁelds that operate at the intersection of sonic and environment

design practices. Through in-depth study of Pascal Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model and its use and

interviews with researchers at CRESSON, I will further my understanding of the Model and seek to

Hazel Smith, and Roger Dean, “Introduction: Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice –

Towards the Iterative Cyclic Web,” in Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice in the Creative Arts, ed. Hazel Smith, and Roger Dean (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2015), 7.

CRESSON Winter School Workshop conference: 8 January - 1 February 2019, Grenoble, France.

apply it in the project component of this research project.

1.2 D ES CRIPTION OF PROJE CT

In the site investigation project — the “project” component of the Masters — I will investigate how I

may adapt and apply the Sonic Identity Model for use in the early-stage design process to

document, analyse and describe two singular urban sonic environments from an individual

practitioner’s subjective listening perspective. The project will involve both research and practice

and include three key stages:

・ Analysis of the Sonic Identity Model;

・ Interpretation and adaptation of the Sonic Identity Model; and

・ Investigation of the sonic environments of two project sites within RMIT University: the indoor Couch Study Space and the outdoor University Lawn.

The key stages of project work are not discrete or linear; they are iterative and overlapping and will

Analysis of the Sonic Identity Model

Investigation of the Project Sites

Interpretation & Adaptation of the Model

Figure 2: Key Stages of the Site investigation Project

This diagram displays the iterative, non-linear structure of the three major stages of project work through cycles of reﬂexive action research.

be carried out continuously across the research project.

Sonic Identity Model Analysis

The analysis stage of project work will involve research, analysis and understanding of Amphoux’s

Sonic Identity Model with a focus on its methods for data collection and conceptual tools.

Interpretation and Adaptation of the Sonic Identity Model

Through continued Model analysis and practice-based site investigations I will interpret and adapt

the Sonic Identity Model. I will produce a structured adaptation of the Model for studying individual

urban spaces from my subjective listening perspective.

Investigation of the Project Sites

I will apply the Sonic Identity Model adaptation and investigate the sonic environments of the project

sites. Through practice-based site studies I will document and analyse each sonic environment from

my own listening perspective. I will then describe ﬁndings on the sonic environments of the Couch

Study Space and the University Lawn.

The site investigation project will conclude with three outputs:

・ A comprehensive explanation of the Sonic Identity Model (chapter 3).

・ An adaptation of the Sonic Identity Model, suitable for use in the early stages of urban sonic design for an individual practitioner to document, analyse and describe urban sonic

environments from an individual listening perspective (chapter 5).

・ The documentation, analysis and multimodal description of the sonic environments of the

Couch Study Space and the University Lawn (chapter 5).

1.3 M E THODOLOGY

To carry out this project I will employ a synthesis of reﬂexive action research and practice-based

activity to answer the following four research questions:

1 How do we understand approaches to urban sonic design as a sub-domain of sound

studies?

To answer this question, I will conduct a high-level review of the interdisciplinary ﬁeld of sound

studies and the sub-domain of urban sonic design (chapter 2). I will review four key ﬁelds

which this research project sits across: soundscape studies, environmental noise

management, urban soundscape design and sonic experience studies (the work of

CRESSON). I will examine the established attitudes, approaches and methods in each ﬁeld

and the broader domain challenges documented by practitioners. Through doing so I will

survey the range of established approaches available to designers and highlight their

diﬀerences and similarities.

2 How do we comprehensively understand Pascal Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model?

Following research into established urban sonic design approaches, I will conduct an in-depth

analysis and comprehensive explanation of the selected approach under investigation — the

Sonic Identity Model (chapter 3). I will research for design, or research “to enable design,” 10

investigating the Sonic Identity Model in detail so that I may then apply it in creative practice.

Understanding of the Sonic Identity Model will be developed though extensive study of the

limited English resources available, the translation of French resources, primary interviews with

researchers of CRESSON, an international ﬁeld trip to attend CRESSON’s Winter School

Workshop conference (undertaken 28 January to 1 February 2019), and project work (chapter

5). I will focus my Model analysis on its guiding principles, aims, methods for data collection,

conceptual tools for analysis, and structure. I will emphasise methods and conceptual tools

from the Model that will be applied in the site investigation project — Sonic Mind Maps, the

Sonic Composition tool and the Sonic Eﬀects tool.

3 How have practitioners applied Pascal Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model?

To answer this research question I will review Amphoux’s directives for Sonic Identity Model

use against English-language practitioner uses of the Model over the last 27 years — since

Amphoux’s publication in 1993 — of which there are few (chapter 4). I will investigate ﬁve case

Peter Downton, Design Research (Melbourne: RMIT University Press, 2004), 17.

studies in detail. The case studies include one PhD research project by Björn Hellström, one

Masters by Research project by David Paquette, and studies by Isabel López Barrio & José

Carles, Aimilia Karapostoli & Nefta-Eleftheria Votsi, and two studies by Konstantinos Vogiatzis

& Nicolas Rémy.

I will examine, compare and contrast the ways in which practitioners have applied the Model

with a focus on its methods for data collection and conceptual tools for analysis. I will evaluate

the reported usefulness of the overall Model and its speciﬁc methods and tools.

4 How can the Sonic Identity Model be adapted and applied in the early stages of urban

sonic design?

To answer this ﬁnal question I will apply my understanding of the Sonic Identity Model in the

site investigation project. Through three stages of project work — Sonic Identity Model

analysis, interpretation and adaptation of the Model, and investigation of the project sites — I

will adapt and apply the Sonic Identity Model to investigate the sonic environments of the

indoor Couch Study Space and the outdoor University Lawn in RMIT University.

Through action research I will engage in reﬂexive cycles of planning, acting, observing and

reﬂecting. Through this iterative approach I will work to adapt the Sonic Identity Model and

apply the Model adaptation to document, analyse and describe the sonic environments of the

Couch Study Space and the University Lawn. I will engage in self-reﬂexive research,

examining myself (the researcher) and the aﬀect I have upon the research, and vice versa. As

all stages of the site investigation project will be carried out by me, project work will take a

highly subjective and auto-ethnographic approach to data collection and analysis. The

purpose of this approach is to critically examine, reﬁne and extend my own technical skills.

Through answering these four research questions, I seek to achieve ﬁve aims:

1. Understand the established attitudes, approaches, methods and challenges to urban sonic

design as a sub-domain of sound studies (chapter 2).

2. Develop a comprehensive understanding and contemporary explanation of the Sonic Identity

Model (chapter 3).

3. Compare, contrast and evaluate the reported usefulness of the Sonic Identity Model by

Wilfred Carr, and Stephen Kemmis, Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research

(London: RoutledgeFarmer, 1986), 162-165.

Steve Mann, The Research Interview: Reﬂective Practice and Reﬂexivity in Research Processes

(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), 27; Mariam Attia, and Julian Edge, “Be(com)ing a Reﬂexive Researcher: a Developmental Approach to Research Methodology,” Open Review of Educational Research 4, no. 1 (2017): 35, https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1300068.

practitioners (chapter 4).

4. Develop an adaptation of the Sonic Identity Model suitable for an individual practitioner to

investigate urban sonic environments from a subjective listening perspective in the early-stage

design process (chapter 5).

5. Present high-level ﬁndings on the sonic environments of the project sites (chapter 5).

As a Masters, this creative practice research project is focused on the mastery of sonic design tools

and techniques. This Masters project serves to develop, reﬁne and extend my skills in listening,

1 0

analysing, expressing and communicating sonic information experienced in everyday environments.

1.4 P RACTIC E BACKGROUND

I developed a musical sensibility through classical music training, understanding sound through its

rhythm, dynamics, pitch, structure and musical notation. This understanding shifted through my

Bachelor of Music Technology (audio engineering) completed at the Queensland Conservatorium of

Music in 2013. I came to view sound as a signal and understood sound through its frequency

spectrum, clarity and signal-to-noise ratio.

Through classical concert recording work I shifted focus away from the music being recorded and

towards the specialised spaces it ﬁlled. My growing interest in the relationship between sound and

space led me to the Spatial Information Architecture Laboratory (SIAL) Sound Studios at RMIT

University. SIAL Sound Studios was the ﬁrst example of interdisciplinary and environment-focused

sonic practice I had come across in Australia. Through SIAL my interests shifted again, this time

from the specialised listening environment to the everyday. I now teach in a lecturing role in

Soundscape Studies and design courses in the School of Design at RMIT University.

This Masters serves as a through-line between practices: at one end there is audio engineering, the

practice I was trained in; at the other lies the practice I am moving into. This research project

provides space for speculating on what that practice might be, and for developing the knowledge,

1 1

skills and techniques I need to operate within it.

1.5 R ATIONALE

This research project holds importance for practitioners and artists working with sound in the

physical environment.

Kytö, Uimonen and Rémy state that to study the urban sonic environment we need combined

multidisciplinary approaches to analyse not only the physical parameters of sound, but also the

interaction between sound, practices and space. This research project oﬀers insights into one

established methodology for studying urban sonic environments from a multidisciplinary

perspective. The Sonic Identity Model appears to have reached few English-speaking practitioners

since its ﬁrst publication in 1993. The detailed description and explanation of the methodology

presented in chapter 3 and the review of its use in chapter 4 may be of importance to practitioners

seeking to engage with the Model.

The urban sonic environment cannot be understood purely through physical measurement. Nor can

it be understood simply through reading or thinking — it must be heard, listened to and

experienced. However, it is diﬃcult to document, study and describe subjective listener

experiences. The site investigation project in chapter 5 demonstrates how a listener’s subjective

experience may be quantiﬁed and expressed through use of the Sonic Identity Model’s conceptual

tools.

Given the interdisciplinary nature of this area of practice, cross-disciplinary collaboration is

important. To do this, Hällgren argues that representation and communication is key. Sound

cannot be represented in a magazine, or expressed through a textbook. Audio recording, the most

common medium for representing sound, has its limitations. As Kytö, Rémy and Uimonen argue,

“the representation of sound is not equivalent to sound itself, not to speak of the memory connected

to a certain sonic event.” We must be able to represent and express sound in multiple formats. The

site investigation project provides one example of a rigorous approach for representing a listener’s

experience and communicating about the sonic environment through the use of writing, graphical

representation and listener-focused vocabulary. It may be useful for acousticians and urban design

practitioners seeking to incorporate listener experience into urban environment studies, and

Meri Kytö, Nicolas Rémy, Heikki Uimonen, Françoise Acquier, Gabriel Bérubé, Grégoire Chelkoﬀ,

Noha Gamal Said, et al., European Acoustic Heritage, ed. Meri Kytö, Nicolas Rémy, and Heikki Uimonen (Tampere University of Applied Sciences; Phonogrammarchiv, the Austrian Academy of Sciences; the multidisciplinary collective Escoitar; The Isle of San Simón Foundation; CRESSON, 2012), 36, https:// hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00993848.

David Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment: an Analysis of Three Approaches, Their Synthesis, and a Case Study of Commercial Drive, Vancouver, BC” (Masters thesis, Simon Fraser University, 2004), 2-3, http://summit.sfu.ca/system/ﬁles/iritems1/8672/b51323679.pdf.

Nina Hällgren, “Urban Sound Design: Can We Talk About It?” Sound Eﬀects 2, no. 2 (2012): 43,

https://doi.org/10.7146/se.v2i2.8025.

Kytö, Rémy, Uimonen, Acquier, Bérubé, Chelkoﬀ, Gamal Said, et al., European Acoustic Heritage,

32.

1 2

composers and artists seeking to document and express sound in alternative formats.

2 C H A P T E R

DOM AIN REVI EW: S OUND STUD IES & UR B AN S ONI C DE S I G N

This chapter seeks to answer the following research question:

How do we understand approaches to urban sonic design as a sub-domain of sound

studies?

In this chapter I locate the research project within the area of sound studies and, more speciﬁcally,

within “urban sonic design.” I provide a high-level overview of sound studies and urban sonic design

to understand the emergent area of practice operating at the intersection of sound and environment

design practices. I review four main ﬁelds within urban sonic design and examine and compare the

main attitudes, approaches and methods of each ﬁeld against their historical backdrop. These four

ﬁelds are soundscape studies, environmental noise management, urban soundscape design, and

sonic experience studies (the work of CRESSON). I emphasise qualitative approaches, which are the

primary focus of this Masters.

I then investigate and discuss the challenges associated with these urban sonic design approaches

as documented by practitioners. This domain review serves to explain the range of established

approaches available for a designer in this emerging area of practice, and highlight their diﬀerences

1 3

and similarities.

2.1 S OUND STUDIES

When you hear the term soundscape studies, usually people ask ‘okay, what is that?’ and that is one of the reasons the concept of ‘sound studies’ was introduced. I don’t know how well we have managed to build this because now if someone says they are doing ‘sound studies’ my ﬁrst question would be, ‘could you be a bit more speciﬁc?’ — Heikki Uimonen.

Sound studies is an interdisciplinary area of research and practice which has experienced rapid

growth and gained wide recognition within academia over the past 10 years. It is broadly deﬁned

as a domain that “includes, potentially, the investigation of all sounds.” Or, as one that “studies the

material production and consumption of music, sound, noise and silence, and how these have

changed throughout history and within diﬀerent societies.” Or, from a social science grounding, as

an area that “takes sound as its analytical point of departure or arrival.” The ﬁrst use of the term

“sound studies” is not plainly evident, however Pinch & Bijsterveld are recognised for providing the

ﬁrst clear deﬁnition of the discipline in 2004. Michael Bull & Les Back suggest another name

entirely for this ﬁeld — “auditory culture.” Kane notes that we should perhaps refer to the ﬁeld as

“sound culture studies,” a more accurate banner title that embraces the terms “sound studies” and

“auditory culture.” These diﬀerences in titles underline the dynamic and still-evolving nature of the

ﬁeld, and its humanities and social science groundings. 25

Sound studies is multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary by nature. It extends to ﬁelds including but

not limited to history, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, musicology, ethnomusicology,

organology, sound art, media studies, game studies, cinema studies, cultural studies, science and

Heikki Uimonen, “Aperitif: From Soundscape to Sound Studies — and Ambiances?” (conference

discussion with Meri Kytö, Anthony Pecqueux, and Jean-Paul Thibaud at the CRESSON Winter School, Grenoble, France, 3 February, 2019), https://ehas.hypotheses.org/3509.

Michael Bull, ed., The Routledge Companion to Sound Studies (London: Routledge, 2018), xvii-xviii.

Marcel Cobussen, Vincent Meelberg, and Barry Truax, eds., The Routledge Companion to Sounding

Art (New York: Routledge, 2017), 2.

Trevor Pinch, and Karin Bijsterveld, “Sound Studies: New Technologies and Music,” Social Studies

of Science 24, no. 5 (2004): 636.

Jonathan Sterne, ed., The Sound Studies Reader (New York: Routledge, 2012), 2.

Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard, “What is Sound Studies?” in Routledge Companion to Sound Studies, ed.

Michael Bull (London: Routledge, 2018), 16.

Michael Bull, and Les Back, eds., The Auditory Culture Reader (New York: Berg, 2003).

Brian Kane, “Sound Studies Without Auditory Culture: a Critique of the Ontological Turn,” Sound

Studies 1, no. 1 (2015): 3, https://doi.org/10.1080/20551940.2015.1079063.

1 4

technology studies, acoustics, psychoacoustics, architecture, gender studies, cultural studies,

communication studies, queer studies, urban studies, acoustic ecology, sound and soundscape

design, and sensory studies. 26

We see that established scholars and theorists in the ﬁeld of sound studies are still asking themselves the same question: ‘what is sound studies?’ — Jean-Paul Thibaud. 27

The ranging available deﬁnitions of sound studies are not entirely revealing separately or together.

The far-reaching disciplinary scope of sound studies add more uncertainty. It is consequently

unclear what is and is not sound studies. This raises issues for a practitioner in terms of what they

may call themselves, and how they may position their work. The area may be best thought of, as

Sterne describes it, “a set of shared intellectual aspirations; not a discrete set of objects, methods

or the space between them.” 28

Despite these broad and open boundaries, sound studies is limited in its western cultural framing.

Throughout the handbooks, volumes and companions on sound studies published in the last

decade there is a lack of inclusion of non-white, non-western contributors. A scant number of

pieces step outside of this western narrative. However as Stadler highlights, the strength of these

non-western works is undermined by their isolation. In Steingo and Sykes’ publication Re-

Mapping Sound Studies the authors state that the narrow framing and “northern-centric narrative”

of sound studies emphasises speciﬁc values, cultures and listener subjects, and the voices of non-

western cultures fall silent. 30

Despite the interdisciplinary breadth of sound studies, the ﬁeld as a whole has remained deeply committed to Western intellectual lineages and histories — David Novak and Matt Sakakeeny. 31

In undertaking this research project I became increasingly aware of the narrow western lens within

which I work. I acknowledge that this research project obliges this western narrative; it focuses on

European theories and methodologies, and is put into practice by me, a western, white practitioner.

Bull, The Routledge Companion to Sound Studies, 2; Sterne, The Sound Studies Reader, 3; Trevor Pinch, and Karin Bijsterveld, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Sound Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 6-7.

Jean-Paul Thibaud, “Aperitif: From Soundscape to Sound Studies — and Ambiances?”

Sterne, The Sound Studies Reader, 3.

Gustavus Stadler, “On Whiteness and Sound Studies,” Sounding Out!, 6 July, 2015, https://

soundstudiesblog.com/2015/07/06/on-whiteness-and-sound-studies/.

Gavin Steingo, and Jim Sykes, eds., Remapping Sound Studies (Durham: Duke University Press,

2019), 6-7, 25.

David Novak, and Matt Sakakeeny, eds., Keywords in Sound (Durham: Duke University Press,

31 2015), 7.

1 5

Through preliminary research I have begun investigating sound and environment research and

creative practice focused on non-western perspectives in Australia. I have come across a limited

number of publications and recent research projects and creative works, included in Appendix 2,

which may be of interest to readers. This is a ﬁrst step towards understanding non-western forms of

1 6

knowing.

2.2 U RB AN SONIC DESIGN

While the notion of sound studies may be considered relatively new, the many disciplines from

which it has grown are not. There is a long history of sonic practice in the environment that precedes

sound studies. From the architectural, social and technical developments of the early 20th Century,

the ﬁeld of acoustics has changed the way we control sound, and the way we interpret it. Through

to the present day, the many ﬁelds now located within sound studies investigate the relationship

between sound and the environment from varying perspectives.

When the urban environment is emphasised, blurred domain boundaries begin to take shape and

relevant ﬁelds become apparent, including soundscape studies, urban soundscape planning and

design, environment design, sound art, electroacoustic music and composition, sensory studies,

experience design, anthropology and sociology. The name “urban sonic design” is used here as an

umbrella term to encompass and refer to these ﬁelds that investigate sound in the urban

environment. The term is borrowed from Pascal Amphoux, who in 1993 brieﬂy described a

hypothetical discipline called “urban sonic design.” 32

DOMAIN: SOUND STUDIES

Anthropology

Cultural studies

Communication studies

History

Ethnomusicology

Musicology

Organology

Sociology

SUB-DOMAIN: URBAN SONIC DESIGN

Urban soundscape design

Sensory studies

Soundscape studies

Experience studies

Electroacoustic music

Sound art

Environmental noise management

Science and technology studies

Sonic experience studies

Urban studies

Philosophy

Cinema studies

Psychoacoustics

Media studies

Game studies

Architecture

Figure 3: Positioning of Research Project in Sound Studies & Urban Sonic Design

This diagram locates the research project within sound studies and more speciﬁcally in the sub-domain of urban sonic design. It highlights the four key disciplines the research project sits across and relates to.

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 78-79.

1 7

This research project is positioned across four key ﬁelds of urban sonic design: soundscape studies,

environmental noise management, urban soundscape design and “sonic experience studies” — a

term used here to describe the unique work of CRESSON.

These four ﬁelds can be understood by examining their diﬀerent attitudes and approaches towards

sound in the environment. Schafer describes two overarching attitudes towards sound: “sound-

positive” and “sound-negative.” Through these attitudes, practitioners view environmental sounds

as a waste (sound-negative) or as a resource (sound-positive). These attitudes largely dictate the

approaches applied in practice. Such approaches ﬁt into three main categories: “defensive,”

“oﬀensive” and “creative.” Through these three approaches, objective and subjective methods are

applied.

Soundscape Studies

Sonic Experience Studies

I

Urban Soundscape Design

E V T S O P D N U O S

Environmental Noise Management

I

E V T A G E N D N U O S

DEFENSIVE APPROACH

OFFENSIVE APPROACH

CREATIVE APPROACH

Figure 4: Key Domain Attitudes & Approaches to the Sonic Environment

This diagram displays the general attitudes and approaches of soundscape studies, urban soundscape design, environmental noise management and sonic experience studies (CRESSON).

R. Murray Schafer, The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World

(Rochester: Destiny Books, 1994), 4.

A. Lex Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” in

Proceedings of 43rd International Congress on Noise Control Engineering (Melbourne: The Australian Acoustical Society, 2014), 2.

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 77-79.

1 8

The defensive approach to the sonic environment focuses on “protecting the environment from

acoustic pollution.” This approach engages in a sound-negative attitude, and is most prevalent in

traditional acoustic and environmental noise management practices. The oﬀensive approach

employs a sound-positive attitude and focuses on the consolidation of the sonic milieu and the

regulation of social interactions. This approach is often applied in urban soundscape management,

planning and design. The creative approach also takes a sound-positive attitude, and focuses on

the composition of the landscape and the development of sonic awareness in listeners. A

combination of oﬀensive and creative approaches are predominantly applied in soundscape studies

and sonic experience studies. These diﬀerences in attitudes and approaches in urban sonic design

ﬁelds determine the methods and techniques applied in practice.

2.2.1 EN VIRONMENTAL NOIS E M AN AGE MENT

The ﬁeld of acoustics, which developed early in the 20th Century out of physicist Wallace Sabine’s

work on reverberation, has long been considered a scientiﬁc and applied ﬁeld of practice. As a

branch of acoustical engineering, environmental noise management is rooted in this scientiﬁc

foundation.

Through a defensive approach to sonic environment management, sound is considered to be “a

waste product and, as with all wastes, the sound is to be reduced and managed.” The sonic

environment is understood using an objective energy-based model. Sound is considered to be a

series of energy transfers or signal transfers, a linear chain of events from source to receiver; sound

comes from the environment and travels to a listener, and vice versa. 42

The signal-focused defensive approach of environmental noise management is of great value to

practitioners working with sound. Truax notes that an objective understanding of sound is

“absolutely essential for the study and practice of acoustic design.” This signal-focused approach

is applied in other related branches of acoustical engineering, including architectural engineering

and audio engineering. Since the 1930s, these scientiﬁc disciplines have changed the sound of the

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 77.

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 78.

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 78-79.

Emily Thompson, The Soundscape of Modernity: Architectural Acoustics and the Culture of

Listening in America, 1900–1933 (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002).

A. Lex Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” 2.

Barry Truax, Acoustic Communication (Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1984), 4-5.

Truax, Acoustic Communication, 4-9.

Truax, Acoustic Communication, 85.

Thompson, The Soundscape of Modernity, 172.

1 9

modern world through their desire for “clean, eﬃcient sound.” This objective is upheld today.

Through its defensive approach environmental noise management deals almost exclusively with

listener discomfort. Sound abatement, control and mitigation methods are used to address this

discomfort. Noise control uses three strategies for action: source control, transmission management

and receiver protection. These strategies rely on physical measurement and physical description

— that is, objective levels or loudness and the classiﬁcation of sound sources. Other measurable

parameters include sound spectrum, temporal pattern, sharpness, roughness and ﬂuctuation

strength. 48

This energy transfer model is well-established globally as the dominant approach for working with

sound in the environment. This holds true in Australia; urban sonic environments are presently

addressed through noise abatement policies that focus upon architectural design, urban planning

and land use planning, and the use of noise control, mitigation and structural sound abatement. 49

The customary use of defensive approaches in Australia reveal a general sound-negative attitude

towards the sonic environment.

The defensive approach of environmental noise management and the ﬁeld’s signal-focused methods

are valuable tools for objectively evaluating the urban sonic environment. However, sound quality

cannot be understood exclusively through objectivity and physical measurement. There are clear

limitations to defensive approaches, and issues arise from relying solely upon these methods in

practice. Key dimensions of sound such as context, information, listener-environment relationships,

individual listener attitudes and preferences, and the eﬀects of sound upon listeners are integral to

understanding the sonic environment. However as Truax states, these dimensions are not the focus

of traditional acoustics. This area of practice was never intended to oﬀer solutions for complex

urban scenarios. Diﬃculties in handling the sonic environment stem from an over-dependence on

the ﬁeld of acoustics and from attempting to solve issues that are outside the methodological scope

Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” 2.

A. Lex Brown, and Andreas Muhar, “An Approach to the Acoustic Design of Outdoor Space,”

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 47, no. 6 (2004): 829, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/0964056042000284857.

Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” 5.

Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” 4.

Australian Government, The Health Eﬀects of Environmental Noise (Commonwealth of Australia,

49 2018), 20.

Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” 5; Manon Raimbault, and Danièle Dubois, “Urban Soundscapes: Experiences and Knowledge,” Cities 22, no. 5 (2005): 339-350; Brigitte Schulte-Fortkamp, Bennett M. Brooks, and Wade R. Bray, “Soundscape: an Approach to Rely on Human Perception and Expertise in the Post-Modern Community Noise Era,” Acoustics Today 3, no. 1 (2007): 7-15, https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2961148.

Truax, Acoustic Communication, 12; Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to

Environmental Noise Management,” 4.

Truax, Acoustic Communication, 34.

2 0

of the ﬁeld. 52

In the context of this research project, it is essential to understand the dominant defensive approach

for managing sound in the environment. This knowledge is important for understanding how nascent

oﬀensive and creative subjective approaches — such as the Sonic Identity Model — may support

established practice approaches and oﬀer complementary tools for designing urban environments.

2.2.2 S OUNDS CAP E STUDIE S

McLuhan & Carpenter are well known in the ﬁeld for their insights into the notion of acoustic space

in the early 1960s. This notion re-emerged as the “acoustic environment” in the late 1960s,

through the work of the World Soundscape Project. Led by R. Murray Schafer, the World

Soundscape Project was founded in 1969 at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada. The

Project is known for its establishment of the ﬁeld of “acoustic ecology” or “soundscape studies” and

the popularisation of the term “soundscape.” The World Soundscape Project developed a number

of strategies, approaches and methods for soundscape studies through research activities and

established key values from which to operate. The Project’s activities largely constitute what

soundscape studies is today.

Soundscape studies is described by Schafer as the “study of sounds in relationship to life and

society.” Schafer regards the soundscape to be a “huge musical composition, unfolding around us

ceaselessly,” and more broadly as “any portion of the sonic environment regarded as a ﬁeld for

study.” These sweeping deﬁnitions may be seen as problematic for the purposes of concise

classiﬁcation and are not dissimilar to the deﬁnitions of sound studies. In fact, the two areas are

closely linked. Sterne notes that the “soundscape” notion is central to sound studies, referring to the

concept as “the most enduring spatial ﬁgure in sound studies.” 57

Deﬁnitions of the ﬁeld continue to vary today. It is understood here from the perspective of Leah

Barclay of the Australian Forum for Acoustic Ecology, who considers the ﬁeld of acoustic ecology to

be “the umbrella ﬁeld that is constantly evolving in exploring the social, cultural and ecological

aspects of our environment through sound — a truly transdisciplinary ﬁeld embracing the artistic

Edmund Carpenter, and Marshall McLuhan, eds., “Acoustic Space,” Exploration in Communication:

An Anthology (London: Beacon Press, 1960), 65-70.

Schafer, The Soundscape, 205.

Schafer, The Soundscape, 274.

Sterne, The Sound Studies Reader, 91.

Leah Barclay, “Acoustic Ecology and Ecological Sound Art: Listening to Changing Ecosystems,” in

Sound, Media, Ecology, ed. Milena Droumeva, and Randolph Jordan (Cham: Palgrave MacMillan, 2019), 161-162.

2 1

and scientiﬁc possibilities of listening to the environment.”58

Soundscape studies’ roots lie in the technological innovations of the 20th Century and the

ecological movements of the 1960s and 70s that responded to such developments. At the time of

the Project’s formation and the establishment of the ﬁeld a traditionally defensive, science-based

approach to sound research was customary. Schafer’s “soundscape” concept brought “a breath of

fresh air in the scientiﬁc context,” rehabilitated ordinary and forgotten sonic cultures, and highlighted

the value of ecological listening and sound aesthetics. 60

Two key values underpinned the work of the World Soundscape Project: the musicality of the

environment, and the ecological value of the soundscape. These values, upheld in the ﬁeld today,

place listeners front and centre in the study of the sonic environment. In contrast to the sound-

negative attitude of environmental noise management, soundscape studies takes a sound-positive

approach, focusing on the preservation and “total appreciation of the acoustic environment.” 62

The Project developed two key oﬀensive and creative approaches for working with the soundscape:

the practical approach of “acoustic design” and the accompanying theoretical approach of

“acoustic ecology.” Through acoustic ecology, practitioners may study, document and together

make recommendations for improving the soundscape. Acoustic design is the applied

counterpart; an approach for preserving and designing the aesthetic qualities of the soundscape. 64

Acoustic design principles outlined by Schafer include soundscape preservation and design through

noise abatement; sound testing; sound preservation; imaginative sound design and acoustic

environment stimulation; soundscape repair; and soundscape composition. 65

In addition to these approaches, Barry Truax — an original member of the World Soundscape

Project and now its director — developed the Acoustic Communication Model, an analytical

framework for understanding the sonic environment through a communicational perspective. 66

Published in 1984, the Acoustic Communication Model draws greatly on the work of the Project.

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 5.

Jean-François Augoyard, “The Cricket Eﬀect: Which Tools for Research on Sonic Urban

Ambiances?” in From Awareness to Action: Proceedings from “Stockholm, Hey Listen!” Conference on Acoustic Ecology, Stockholm, June 9-13, 1998, ed. Henrik Karlsson (Stockholm: The Royal Swedish Academic of Music, 1999), 35.

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 5-6.

Schafer, The Soundscape, 4.

Schafer, The Soundscape, 271.

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 114.

Truax, Acoustic Communication, xii.

2 2

The term “soundscape” is a basic part of its framework. 67

The Acoustic Communication Model aims to “understand the interlocking behavior of sound, the

listener and the environment as a system of relationships, not as isolated entities.” The framework

aims to integrate the polarising approaches and attitudes of the soundscape model and the signal

transfer model of acoustics. The Model builds upon Schafer’s “acoustic design” approach and

describes “acoustic design” and “electroacoustic design” as methods for modifying the functional

relationships within the listener-environment system, which may be achieved through modiﬁcation of

the sound environment or the listening and thinking habits of listeners.

David Paquette, in his Masters thesis Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment: an analysis

of three approaches, their synthesis, and a case study of Commercial Drive, Vancouver, BC, states

that the methodology used by the World Soundscape Project was never explicitly described. 71

However through the Project’s activities a number of concepts, methods, terminology and exercises

were developed, drawing on methods and perspectives from communication studies, psychology,

sociology, economics and anthropology. 72

Soundscape studies oﬀers several methods for data collection including audio recording, sound

maps and graphical representations of soundscapes, objective acoustic measurements of sound

levels, sound counts, sound lists, interviews and surveys, listening walks, soundwalks and sound

diaries. Schafer presents sound description, graphic notation and sound classiﬁcation in particular

as three techniques for preserving and analysing the soundscape. Through the classiﬁcation system

sounds may be categorised “according to their physical characteristics (acoustics) or the way in

which they are perceived (psychoacoustics); according to their function and meaning (semiotics and

semantics); or according to their emotional or aﬀective qualities (aesthetics).” Alongside these

methods and techniques soundscape studies oﬀers an extensive vocabulary for soundscape

description in the Handbook for Acoustic Ecology. Many terms within it are borrowed from related

ﬁelds such as phonetics, acoustics, psychoacoustics, psychology, electroacoustics,

Truax, Acoustic Communication, xii.

Barry Truax, “Models and Strategies for Acoustic Design,” (paper presented at the Acoustic Ecology

Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, June 1998), https://www.sfu.ca/~truax/models.html.

Truax, Acoustic Communication, 12.

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 43.

Keiko Torigoe, “A Study of the World Soundscape Project” (Masters thesis, York University, 1982),

191.

Torigoe, “A Study of the World Soundscape Project,” 21, 81, 176-178.

Schafer, The Soundscape, 133.

Torigoe, “A Study of the World Soundscape Project,” 83.

Review of Handbook for Acoustic Ecology ed. by Barry Truax, Leonardo 13, no. 1 (1980):

83-83, https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/599331.

2 3

communications and music. 76

While the World Soundscape Project is no longer an active group, soundscape studies remains an

active interdisciplinary ﬁeld of research and practice. A number of listening exercises developed

through the Project’s educational strategy are applied widely in teaching practice, particularly in

design, media and communication studies. As an educator, I teach soundscape studies to

interdisciplinary students at postgraduate level and have found soundwalking, soundscape

composition and ear-cleaning exercises to be useful tools for the development of students’ critical

listening skills, especially for those in visually-oriented ﬁelds.

2.2.3 URBAN SO UNDSCAPE DE S IGN

When a practitioner studies the sonic environment in the context of architecture and urban design

ﬁelds, Paquette states that emphasis shifts away from the ecological values of soundscape studies

and towards the “social expressions of the environment, [and] the way it is fabricated and then

experienced by inhabitants.” 77

Urban soundscape design, also referred to as soundscape planning, management and design, or as

acoustic design, is a somewhat recent result of the intersection of quantitative environmental noise

management practices and qualitative soundscape studies approaches. This may be seen as a

response to the recognised limitations of environmental noise management practices. It may not be

an established discipline in its own right — at least not presently — but more so as a defensive and

oﬀensive “applied” line of investigation that sits between soundscape studies and the more

established ﬁeld of environmental noise management. 78

Urban soundscape design is distinct from environmental noise management through its

acknowledgement of sound as a resource, and the recognised importance of context and listener

perception. Urban soundscape design approaches focus upon the management, planning and

design of primarily outdoor environments for increased inhabitant enjoyment and comfort —

whether that may be through inﬂuencing the mood, the emotion, the evaluation or the restoration of

visitors. Methods from soundscape studies are seen as complementary tools to that of traditional

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 2.

A. Lex Brown, Jian Kang, and Truls Gjestland, “Towards Standardization in Soundscape Preference

Assessment,” Applied Acoustics 72 (2011): 387.

Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” 1; Dick Botteldooren et al., “Soundscape for European Cities and Landscape: Understanding and Exchanging,” in Soundscape of European Cities and Landscapes, edited by J. Kang et al. (Oxford: Soundscape-COST, 2013), 36-43.

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 2.

2 4

acoustics and environmental noise management. Environment assessment and improvement is

context-speciﬁc, and incorporates considerations towards listener preferences, experiences,

physiological issues, memories and contexts. 81

Similarly to environmental noise management practices, this approach is applied through a scientiﬁc

lens, and soundscape methods are “augmented” into tools for the acoustician. Through urban

soundscape design, practitioners from traditionally quantitative ﬁelds now engag with qualitative

aspects of sound, which is an important development; subjective and qualitative approaches are

now considered to be valuable resources. 83

Given the newness of this approach, frameworks for practice are not yet established. Regardless,

we can gain an understanding of the methods and tools being applied in this area by reviewing

research projects. Methods and tools applied in urban soundscape design projects include:

85 ・ Measurement of listener preferences and assessment of wanted and unwanted sounds;

・ Sound classiﬁcation and categorisation; ・ Assessment of context and semantic features; ・ Soundscape mapping (of noise and other qualities); ・ Physical sound measurement using environmental noise management methods; ・ Soundscape studies concepts and terminology for characterising key features such as “signals” and “soundmarks;” and

Jieling Xiao, Lisa Lavia, and Jian Kang, “Towards an Agile Participatory Urban Soundscape Planning

Framework,” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 61, no. 4 (2018): 678, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09640568.2017.1331843.

Brown, “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management,” 1.

Hellström, Noise Design, 12.

Xiao, Lavia, Kang, “Towards an Agile Participatory Urban Soundscape Planning Framework,” 678.

A. Lex Brown, “Advancing the Concepts of Soundscapes and Soundscape Planning,” in

Proceedings of ACOUSTICS 2011, Gold Coast, Australia, 2011, 6; Xiao, Lavia, Kang, “Towards an Agile Participatory Urban Soundscape Planning Framework.”

Brown, Kang, and Gjestland, “Towards Standardization in Soundscape Preference Assessment.”

Danièle Dubois, Catherine Guastavino, and Manon Raimbault, “A Cognitive Approach to Urban Soundscapes: Using Verbal Data to Access Everyday Life Auditory Categories,” Acta Acustica united with Acustica 92, no. 6 (2006): 865-874.

Bert De Coensel, and Dick Botteldooren, “The Quiet Rural Soundscape and How to Characterize it,”

Acta Acoustica united with Acustica 92, no. 6 (2006): 887-897.

Brown, “Advancing the Concepts of Soundscapes and Soundscape Planning,” 6.

Jian Kang, “Soundscape and Sound Preferences in Urban Squares: A Case Study in Sheﬃeld,”

Journal of Urban Design 10, no. 1 (2005): 61-80.

Xiao, Lavia, and Kang, “Towards an Agile Participatory Urban Soundscape Planning Framework,”

689.

2 5

・ Engagement with stakeholders (planning and administration authorities, academic and practitioner soundscape specialists, designers, community members).

This list of methods is not exhaustive and should not be considered complete. It summarise some of

the approaches currently being applied in urban soundscape design research projects.

There is developing interest in the application of soundscape concepts for the assessment and

design of urban environments. The growing examples of soundscape design research is evidence of

this. A brief review of a small selection of acoustics journals reveals an increasing use of the term

“soundscape” in acoustics and environmental design. At governmental and institutional levels, the

“soundscape” concept is increasingly acknowledged for its value. The recent Australian government

report into the health eﬀects of environmental sound describes the soundscape concept as

180

160

140

120

100

complementary to environmental noise management. 92

Journal of Acoustical Society of America Journal of Applied Acoustics Journal of Building Acoustics International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Figure 5: “Soundscape” Term Use in Sample of Acoustics Journals, 1993-2019

This graph charts the use of the term “soundscape” in a sample of acoustics journals over the past 27 years. During this period of time the World Forum for Acoustic Ecology was founded (1993), the Sonic Identity Model was published (1993), and CRESSON’s Sonic Eﬀect was published in French (1995) and English (2005).

A number of prominent practitioners from adjacent ﬁelds are contributing to the development of this

Australian Government, The Health Eﬀects of Environmental Noise, 5.

2 6

approach, including Jian Kang (environmental and architectural acoustician, UK), A. Lex Brown

(environmental planner, Australia), Dick Botteldooren (acoustician, Belgium) and Danièle Dubois

(psycholinguist, France). Recent projects such as the acoustic design research project between

Transurban (a road operator company in Australia) and RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia,

have provided the ﬁrst international example of “noise transformation” through urban soundscape

design. In this project, highway noise was approached as “a source in musical composition” to

improve local inhabitant’s experience of nearby highways. The soundscape values operating in this

acoustic design project are front and centre. These values are supported by the use of noise

abatement methods.

The emergent work in this area demonstrates the value of combining defensive, oﬀensive and

creative approaches from the ﬁelds of environmental noise management and soundscape studies to

manage and/or design the urban sonic environment.

2.2.4 S ONIC E XPE RI ENCE ST UDI ES

“Sonic experience studies” is a term used here to describe the work of CRESSON — le Centre de

Recherche sur l’Espace Sonore et l’environnement urbain, or the Centre for Research on Sonic

Space and Urban Environment. CRESSON's unique and singular approach to understanding sound

space and the sensory dimensions of urban listener experience is not, from my experience, found

elsewhere.

Formed in Grenoble, France, in 1979, CRESSON is a research centre that developed alongside but

separately to the World Soundscape Project. The centre was born from the thesis Step by Step:

Everyday Walks in a French Urban Housing Project by Jean-François Augoyard — an urbanist,

philosopher and (now) musicologist — and the coming-together of Augoyard and Jean-Jacques

Delétré, an acoustic engineer. Augoyard’s thesis explored the experience of walking through one’s

neighbourhood, and the way in which that experience is expressed. To achieve this, Augoyard

developed a rhetoric to communicate the action from a multidisciplinary perspective. Augoyard and

Delétré conducted collaborative lectures and seminars at the Graduate School of Architecture in

Grenoble, exploring sensory phenomena, sound phenomena, and the spatial, acoustic, cultural and

social dimensions of everyday life. These lectures garnered interest from several students,

including future founding members of CRESSON Jean-Paul Thibaud and Pascal Amphoux. 95

The phenomenological, interdisciplinary and perception-focused themes ﬁrst explored by Augoyard

& Delétré formed the basis of the work that has followed at CRESSON in the 40 years since.

CRESSON has grown from a handful of multidisciplinary researchers to a research centre with

Jordan Lacey et al., RMIT Acoustic Design Innovations for Managing Motorway Traﬃc Noise by

Cancellation and Transformation (Melbourne: Transurban, 2017), https://www.transurban.com/content/dam/ transurban-pdfs/02/news/RMIT-Managing-Motorway-Noise-Report.pdf.

Nicolas Tixier, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 3 February, 2019.

Tixier, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 3 February, 2019.

2 7

approximately 56 members. CRESSON works together with the CRENAU research centre under the

AAU (Ambiances Architectures Urbanities) laboratory in Nantes, France. Through visiting

CRESSON during this Masters I developed an appreciation for the breadth and complexity of the

centre’s work and the interdisciplinary and intersubjective principles that are fundamental to it.

CRESSON’s embracing of the urban environment and ordinary life diﬀerentiates their work distinctly

from that of the World Soundscape Project and soundscape studies. From the perspective of

soundscape studies, urban environments are often described as “lo-ﬁ,” meaning low ﬁdelity and

clarity. This outlook takes a sound-negative attitude towards the sonic environment and diminishes

the value of urban spaces. Whereas Schafer considers the soundscape to be a “musical

composition," at CRESSON researchers view acoustic space as “an instrumentarium, a store of

sounds, which brings forms to social, perceptual, cultural and spatial conﬁgurations.” At

CRESSON, researchers focus not only on the quality of sound, but also the eﬀect of sound upon

100

listeners. Researchers at CRESSON have expressed criticism about the soundscape concept, with

Jean-François Augoyard stating that it is “often too large for detailed analysis of urban life.” While

acknowledging the value of the soundscape approach, CRESSON determined that it was not

suﬃcient to “work comfortably both at the scale of everyday behaviour and at the scale of

architectural and urban spaces.” 101

102

Interdisciplinary work is central to CRESSON’s approach, and is considered one of the building

blocks of its research. CRESSON’s founding research team is evidence of this; researchers came

103

together from architecture, geography, sociology, physics, acoustics, lighting, musicology, urban

planning and philosophy. This interdisciplinary way of working shapes the way research is carried

out, the methods and tools CRESSON have developed, and their intended applicability. CRESSON’s

“About the AAU Laboratory,” AAU Laboratory, AAU: Ambiances Architectures Urbanités, accessed

19 June, 2019, https://aau.archi.fr/laboratoire-aau/.

Barry Truax, “Lo-Fi,” Handbook for Acoustic Ecology, accessed 26 June, 2019, http://www.sfu.ca/

sonic-studio-webdav/handbook/Lo-Fi.html.

Hellström, Noise Design, 21.

R. Murray Schafer, Foreword to Sonic Experience: a Guide to Everyday Sounds, (Montreal: McGill-

Queen's University Press, 2005), xi.

100

Augoyard, “The Cricket Eﬀect,” 120.

101

Jean-François Augoyard, and Henri Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience: a Guide to Everyday Sounds,

trans. Andra McCartney and David Paquette (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2005), 7.

102

Jean-Paul Thibaud, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 2 February, 2019.

103

Jean-François Augoyard, “An Interdisciplinary Notion: the Sonic Eﬀect,” trans. Sophie Provost

(conference presentation, CRESSON Winter School, Grenoble, France, 28 January, 2019), https:// ehas.hypotheses.org/3554.

2 8

founders believed there to be a deﬁciency in tools for describing, explaining and analysing complex

104

sonic environments from an interdisciplinary perspective. To address this problem CRESSON

105

established three key criteria for the development of tools: interdisciplinarity, urban environments

suitability, and capacity for the integration of dimensions beyond aesthetic design.

CRESSON focuses on joint defensive, oﬀensive and creative approaches for sonic environment

analysis and management. Rather than attempting to understand the sonic environment through the

use of exclusively objective or subjective methods, CRESSON embraces objective, subjective and

intersubjective approaches, or “collective” approaches. 106

Researchers have focused on developing interdisciplinary methods and tools that are adaptable and

complementary to existing techniques, such as defensive acoustics and environmental noise

management methods. Over the past 40 years CRESSON has developed conceptual qualitative

tools, high-level theoretical concepts, comprehensive methodologies and practical methods for

understanding and working in the built environment. Such methods and tools include the Sonic

Eﬀect, their most well known paradigm, the Sonic Identity Model (discussed in chapter 3), the EMP

Model, Sonic Mind Maps, commented soundwalks, Re-activated Listening Interviews, qualiﬁed

listening in motion, and the concept of “Ambiance.”

Some methods and techniques developed by researchers, such as commented soundwalks and

Sonic Mind Maps, bear strong similarities to soundwalking and sound mapping techniques from

soundscape studies. These similarities in approaches, and CRESSON’s embracing of defensive

environmental noise management techniques, suggest the approaches and tools developed by

researchers at CRESSON may be complementary to other urban sonic design approaches and

useful for a wide range of practitioners.

In comparison to the work conducted by the World Soundscape Project, dissemination of

CRESSON’s research is limited. This is largely due to language barriers, as a great portion of

CRESSON’s research has not been translated from French to English. Despite this, a number of

countries have collaborated with CRESSON via partnerships and/or research collaborations,

107

including Brazil, Tunisia, England, Switzerland, Spain, Sweden, Greece, Canada, Finland, North

America and Colombia. In Australia CRESSON’s work has been applied in teaching, in the

Soundscape Studies course at RMIT University (of which I am the lecturer), and in research carried

out locally by practitioners Lawrence Harvey and Jordan Lacey.

Although CRESSON has developed a number of approaches and methods, examples of practical

application from CRESSON researchers are limited as it is outside the scope of the research centre’s

104

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 6-7.

105

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 7.

106

Hellström, Noise Design, 21; Thibaud, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 2 February, 2019.

107

Tixier, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 3 February, 2019.

2 9

funding. France’s strict deﬁnitions for its research facilities mean that CRESSON’s work is purely

108

“academic” and “laboratory” based. Instead, some researchers operate on the border of research

and practice, conducting research from within CRESSON and applying this research externally in

their professional practices. 109

While CRESSON originally focused upon sound space and analysing conditions of production and

110

listener perception it has since expanded past sound to include light, thermal, olfactory, tactical and

kinaesthetic phenomena. There is a clear shift in its research focus towards sensory work.

111

CRESSON is now moving closer to the social sciences than before, developing a “stronger socially

112

oriented approach.” Its work now questions social, ecological, aesthetic, numerical, political and

113

ethical issues. New concepts such as “anthropocene” and “impregnation” (a concept whose

108

Tixier, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 3 February, 2019.

109

Tixier, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 3 February, 2019.

110

“CRESSON Research Team,” AAU Laboratory, AAU: Ambiances Architectures Urbanités, accessed

19 June, 2019, https://aau.archi.fr/crenau/.

111

Thibaud, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 2 February, 2019.

112

AAU Laboratory, “CRESSON Research Team.”

113

Tixier, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 3 February, 2019; Thibaud, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 2

February, 2019.

3 0

English translation is misleading) are key ideas under investigation.

2.3 C HALLENGES FACING PRACTITIONERS IN URBAN

SO NI C DESIG N

When focusing in on urban sonic design approaches a number of interrelated and overlapping

challenges arise around complexity of approaches, applicability of theory in practice,

communication, and applied project examples. These challenges are discussed below with a focus

upon qualitative urban sonic design approaches, which are central to this project.

Complexity of Approaches

Soundscape studies and sonic experience studies oﬀer a number of complex conceptual tools and

methods. This complexity is particularly notable in the work of CRESSON. The research centre has

114

developed several rigorous methodologies and concepts, and the breadth of these extensive tools

115

may seem “impenetrable” to practitioners, particularly new ones. CRESSON’s lack of “user

friendly tools for the student and practitioner” makes for a steep learning curve. For non-

Francophones, understanding these complex concepts and tools is more diﬃcult again.

Applicability of Theory in Practice

Applying these established oﬀensive and creative sonic design approaches in practice brings about

an additional challenge — putting theory into practice. This is especially diﬃcult in the context of

everyday professional practice. Hellström states that “CRESSON has not been very successful in

116

implementing their dynamic models and methods in practice [because] the majority of them do not

have the shape of ‘recipes.’” This challenge is not unique to CRESSON; soundscape studies

117

methods developed by researchers associated with the World Soundscape Project, such as the

soundscape approach and Truax’s Acoustic Communication Model, also encounter this diﬃculty.

118

Professionals in the urban building and planning ﬁelds operate in a regulated industry that imposes

strict regulations and standards. Sound must be reduced to irrefutable numerical values — often

for liability or to uphold policy compliance and laws. Approaches from sonic experience studies and

soundscape studies are diﬃcult to realise in these settings, where qualitative and subjective

119

approaches are in direct “conﬂict with the common trends between formalisation of standards in

114

Hellström, Noise Design, 24-25.

115

Hellström, Noise Design, 24-25.

116

Hellström, Noise Design, 23.

117

Hällgren, “Urban Sound Design,” 42.

118

Hellström, Noise Design, 23.

119

Hellström, Noise Design, 23.

3 1

design.” For an architect or acoustician to engage with these tools, they must understand the

120

underlying theories. There are missing links between theoreticians and practitioners, and it is

121

consequently diﬃcult for professional practitioners to engage with complex qualitative theories and

approaches.

Communication

When applying interdisciplinary and complex theoretical approaches in practice, practitioners must

be able to communicate their approach. Communication challenges in the ﬁeld occur between

theoreticians, practitioners and the layperson, and between disciplines.

Communication challenges between theoreticians and practitioners mean that the theories remain

theoretical and professional practice cannot draw from them. This challenge is evident not only in

the oﬀensive and creative approaches of soundscape studies and sonic experience studies, but in

the defensive approaches of environmental acoustics, too. Truax notes that knowledge from the

122

ﬁeld of acoustics does not ﬁlter down and reach the general public, leaving decision-making to

those who can speak the technical vocabulary. This inability to communicate aﬀects the

layperson, excluding and diminishing the value and knowledge of an everyday listener.

When diﬀerent ﬁelds attempt to work together, communication between interfacing schools of

123

thought is critical. However, each ﬁeld working with sound does so from a diﬀerent point of entry,

and the vocabulary used to discuss sound varies from discipline to discipline. The diﬀerent ways

of talking about sound result in an inability to understand methods and theories outside of a

practitioner’s own discipline. Research and results are not disseminated, meaning that even for

124

closely related subjects “the pieces in the puzzle do not ﬁt together and there is no common

pattern.” This issue of interdisciplinary communication may be seen to start with education.

Tertiary programs generally teach within discrete disciplinary boundaries. Closely related

environmental design ﬁelds, such as architecture, landscape design and urban design seldom

include sound in educational programs.

Lack of Well Documented and Applied Project Examples

There is a lack of well documented projects and applied examples of qualitative urban sonic design

approaches in practice. The task of project documentation and representation is diﬃcult given the

120

Hellström, Noise Design, 23.

121

Hällgren, “Urban Sound Design,” 42-43.

122

Truax, Acoustic Communication, 3.

123

Thibaud, “Aperitif: From Soundscape to Sound Studies — and Ambiances?”

124

Henrik Karlsson, “Ljudvärldar, Nya forskningsfält för musikfozskare,” in Svensk tidskrift för

musikforskning (särtryck) 2000: 23-24, quoted in Björn Hellström, Noise Design: Architectural Modelling and the Aesthetics of Urban Acoustic Space (Göteborg: Bo Ejeby Forlag, 2003), 14.

3 2

immaterial nature of sound. Lawrence Harvey states that “unlike the visual, there are few experiential

125

metaphors in common use, which can be shared by a sound designer to explain [their] work, or the

experience [they are] attempting to provoke via a soundscape.” Harvey brings attention to the

lack of project documentation through his investigation into site-speciﬁc sound practices in

Australia. He references documentation practices in visual ﬁelds and calls for the development of

126

improved methods for the pre-project modelling, project documentation and post-project

evaluation.

In visual public arts practice various forms of representation are used to communicate the artist’s intentions and the indicative content of a work. These include physical scale models, analogue or digital images, sketches, plans or photomontage. For a sound work, similar representations might be through acoustic modelling and auralisation techniques, or on-site testing using temporary systems to demonstrate indicative content. 127

Harvey argues that improved project documentation will support cross-disciplinary communication

and improve understanding in the project development and execution stages. Ros Bandt’s

128

Australian Sound Design Project provides an extensive database of documented sound design

projects in public space in Australia. This resource is an excellent starting point for sound-based

project documentation, though entries have stagnated since 2007.

The lack of applied project examples of qualitative urban sonic design approaches furthers

challenges in communication and connecting theory and practice. Hellström notes that the lack of

129

applied examples of CRESSON’s methodologies and concepts is one reason that there is

130

“scepticism” around CRESSON’s approaches by acousticians and architects.

We need applied, concrete “how to” examples to learn from. With limited project documentation

and applied project examples it is diﬃcult to evidence established qualitative urban sonic design

approaches. This reinforces “skepticism” towards these design tools and makes communicating

complex ideas to professional practitioners, everyday persons and researchers in other disciplines

131

all the more challenging. We need applied examples to bridge the disconnect between theory and

125

Lawrence Harvey, “Improving Models for Urban Soundscape Systems,” Sound Eﬀects 3, no. 3

(2013): 123, https://doi.org/10.7146/se.v3i3.18444.

126

Harvey, “Improving Models for Urban Soundscape Systems,” 123.

127

Harvey, “Improving Models for Urban Soundscape Systems,” 123.

128

Ros Bandt, “The Australian Sound Design Project,” University of Melbourne, accessed 18

November 2019, http://www.sounddesign.unimelb.edu.au/site/index2.html.

129

Hellström, Noise Design, 21.

130

Hällgren, “Urban Sound Design,” 38.

131

Hellström, Noise Design, 23.

3 3

practice. We also need practical examples to communicate between one another.

CO N CL USION

Sound studies is a broad interdisciplinary domain with indistinct boundaries and problematic

western-centric framing. Attempting to locate oneself within sound studies is diﬃcult; it may take

practitioners further out to sea. Its exclusionary narrative makes positioning even more diﬃcult for

non-western practitioners. To operate in this area, practitioners must deﬁne their disciplinary

boundaries for themselves and, as Steingo and Sykes, Chattopadhyay, and Stadler emphasise,

132

engage in broader understandings of sound and situate non-western thinking as a fundamental

component of sound studies.

Urban sonic design — the umbrella term used here to describe a sub-domain of sound studies —

encompasses four key ﬁelds which this research project sits across and relates to: environmental

noise management, soundscape studies, urban soundscape design and sonic experience studies.

These ﬁelds present several established ways to manage and design the urban sonic environment.

Environmental noise management takes a sound-negative attitude towards the sonic environment

and traditionally uses defensive approaches and objective methods to understand and manage

sound. In contrast, soundscape studies, urban soundscape design and sonic experience studies

take a sound-positive approach. Soundscape studies oﬀers a range of subjective methods for

documenting, analysing and transforming the soundscape. Urban soundscape design draws upon

these objective and subjective methods from environmental noise management and soundscape

studies to improve inhabitant comfort and enjoyment. Sonic experience studies embraces

defensive, oﬀensive and creative approaches for understanding urban sonic environments.

While each ﬁeld’s perspective towards the sonic environment diﬀers and at times appears

incompatible, each ﬁeld is working separately to understand the same thing — sound. The

approaches and methods available to designers in this emergent area of practice are more

complementary than contrasting. Together, these four ﬁelds oﬀer an extensive pool of cross-

disciplinary resources that designers may draw from to approach, understand and design complex

urban sonic environments from a multi-dimensional and interdisciplinary perspective. However,

practitioners seeking to use these complementary approaches and methods must be aware of the

diﬃculties they may encounter. This includes challenges around complexity of approaches;

applicability of theory in practice; communication between theoreticians, practitioners and

laypersons, and between disciplines; and access to well documented and applied project examples.

This chapter identiﬁed the value of studying sonic environments from diﬀerent perspectives through

the use of interdisciplinary approaches. The following chapter investigates one established

methodology that embraces oﬀensive, defensive and creative approaches and objective and

132

Steingo, and Sykes, Remapping Sound Studies; Budhaditya Chattopadhyay, “Canonization and the

Color of Sound Studies,” Sounding Out!, 6 August, 2018, https://soundstudiesblog.com/2018/08/06/ canonization-and-the-color-of-sound-studies/; Stadler, “On Whiteness and Sound Studies.”

3 4

subjective methods to understand complex urban sonic environments.

C H A P T E R

3

THE SONIC IDENTITY M ODE L: AN UR BAN SONIC DESI G N AP P RO A C H

In chapter 2 I reviewed established urban sonic design approaches and methods in environmental

noise management, soundscape studies, urban soundscape design and sonic experience studies.

In chapter 3 I investigate one sonic experience studies approach in detail to answer the following

research question:

How do we comprehensively understand Pascal Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model?

The Sonic Identity Model is a detailed methodology for researchers to approach the sonic quality

and “identity” of urban spaces. The urban sonic design approach is singular for its level of rigour,

detail and structure.

In this chapter I present a detailed explanation of the Model and its component parts. I introduce the

work and its notion of “sonic identity,” describe how the Model unfolds, and outline limitations to

understanding the Model. I then focus on the Model’s guiding principles, aims, methods for data

collection, conceptual tools for analysis and structure. In particular, I give a greater description of the

methods and conceptual tools investigated in the site investigation project in chapter 5: Sonic Mind

Maps, the Sonic Composition tool and the Sonic Eﬀects concept. I conclude with a description of

my understanding of the Sonic Identity Model.

The explanation of the Sonic Identity Model in this chapter was developed through continued

analysis of the Model using limited English and French resources available, and through Model

interpretation, adaptation, and application in the site investigation project (chapter 5). This chapter

aims to provide a contemporary in-depth explanation of the methodology from my understanding,

as an English-speaking practitioner investigating a French theoretical work. It attempts to pull apart,

re-conﬁgure and present a clear explanation of the Model for the reader, which is lacking in the

3 5

original work.

3.1 OV ERVIEW OF THE METH ODOLOGY

3.1.1 INTRODUCTION T O TH E W ORK

L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, The Sonic Identity of European Cities, was ﬁrst published

in French in 1993 by researcher, geographer and architect Pascal Amphoux. Then a researcher for

IREC in Lausanne, Switzerland, and for CRESSON in Grenoble, France, Pascal Amphoux is a

founding member of CRESSON and now also a professor at the National School of Architecture of

133

Nantes. The Model was developed over a decade of methodological experiments, and through

exploratory research on three Swiss cities. In 2002, the work was interpreted and presented in

135

English by Hellström. 134

The “Sonic Identity Model” presents an interdisciplinary methodology for describing, analysing

and approaching the sonic identity of a city. The Model takes a sound-positive attitude, embraces

oﬀensive, defensive and creative approaches, and encompasses several multimodal methods for

data collection and conceptual tools for analysis.

Methods for data collection include Sonic Mind Maps, Phono-reputable Inquiries and Re-activated

Listening Interviews. These methods are drawn together through what Hellström describes as a

136

“repertoire of concepts that have family resemblance” that, when put together, “frame a

paradigmatic model.” The repertoire of conceptual tools include the CVS (Known, Lived, Sensed)

Model, the Sonic Composition tool, the Sonic Eﬀect notion, and the EMP (Environment, Milieu,

Landscape) Model and its Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria. The Model's methods and concepts are

organised through three chronological approaches.

137

The Model is intended to be used by, quite generally, any practitioner — regardless of their

knowledge of the sonic environment. Amphoux lists examples: “practitioners, elected

138

representatives, researchers, teachers and other professionals who work with the sonic

133

Pascal Amphoux et al., Aux Écoutes de la Ville: la qualité sonore des espaces publics européens, méthode d’analyse comparative. Enquête sur trois villes suisses (CRESSON, IREC Institut de Recherche sur l’Environnement Construit, 1991), https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01373745.

134

Hellström refers to this publication as an “interpretation” rather than a translation.

135

The methodology is described by Hellström as a “manual” or “guide,” by Amphoux as a

“methodological guide,” and by David Paquette, who has extensively applied it, as a “methodology” or “model.” Here, it is referred to simply as “The Sonic Identity Model.”

136

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 60.

137

Pascal Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes (CRESSON; IREC (Institut de

Recherche sur l’Environnement Construit), 1993), 5. (my translation). All translations are mine unless noted otherwise.

138

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 60.

3 6

environment.”

3.1.2 DE FINING “ SONIC IDE N TI T Y”

A city’s sonic identity is 'the set of sounds that make the city give the feeling of remaining identical to itself, which makes it possible to recognise it, or identify it, and to which each of us, ﬁnally, in [our] daily life, identify [ourself]’ — Pascal Amphoux 139

140

“Sonic identity” is deﬁned as the sonic characteristics common to a place, a neighbourhood, or a

city, ordinary and incarnated in everyday life. These sounds typify a place, a moment, or an

141

activity, and are what make it possible to recognise and identify an environment and diﬀerentiate it

from another. Amphoux describes three major characteristics of the notion: “autonomy” (the set

of sounds that are constant and unique to the city), “recognition” (the set of sounds that are

142

recognisable as “signatures” of the city) and “belonging” (the set of sounds by which the individual

143

identiﬁes themselves).

144

Amphoux describes sonic identity as “by principle unattainable.” He states that “we can never

145

pretend to identify the identity of someone or something,” but that we may approach it. It is

146

approached by the way in which we identify the sonic space. The “sonic identity” is always

contextualised and thus, while it may exist, “it is always debatable.”

This concept can be viewed as problematic; the term “identity” is semantically charged and can

147

carry problematic connotations. Amphoux acknowledges this, describing the notion of “identity” as

“very dangerous if we make it a deﬁned category,” making reference to the sometimes

exclusionary nature of the word in society. For practitioners setting out to apply the Sonic Identity

139

Pascal Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000, https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

hal-01564775 (my translation). All translations are mine unless noted otherwise.

140

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 6.

141

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 6.

142

Pascal Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” in Sound Worlds from the Body to the City: LISTEN!, trans. and ed. Ariane Wilson (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019), 132.

143

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 4.

144

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 4.

145

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 131.

146

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

147

Pascal Amphoux, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 14 October, 2019.

3 7

Model, it is important to bear this concern in mind.

3.1.3 L IMITATI ONS TO STUD Y I N G & UNDERSTANDING THE MODE L

For an English-speaking practitioner there are limitations to studying and understanding the Sonic

Identity Model due to its its schematic and French way of thinking. There is often great diﬃculty in

understanding French academic work due to the inherent diﬀerences between French and English

Language and the alternative ways of thinking between the two cultures. 148

In Christine North and John Dack’s translation of Pierre Schaeﬀer’s Treatise on Musical Objects,

North describes this traditionally schematic French way of thinking. She highlights the way in which

149

Pierre Schaeﬀer “shares with French tradition a desire for generalisation and the creation of

universally applicable rules.” These French traditions of schematic thinking and universality are

embedded in the Sonic Identity Model and make it diﬃcult for the English reader to understand.

Amphoux describes the Model through three levels of information — technical, methodological and

150

theoretical. The information is presented laterally, juxtaposed across the page, to allow for “free and

associative” reading. This diagrammatic explanation of the Model is complicated by Amphoux’s

151

directives for reading it: “you can always read in several senses. Horizontally. Vertically. You can

even read backwards.”

Many of the familiar terms Amphoux employs in the Model also carry diﬀerent meanings to what the

English reader may assume or simply do not exist in English — or in French for that matter. As

Hellström notes in his interpretation of Amphoux’s work, “some of the concepts that Amphoux uses

do not exist and/or are not grammatically correct even in the French language. Instead, Amphoux

148

Christine North, “Translator’s Introduction,” in The Treatise on Musical Objects: An Essay Across Disciplines, Pierre Schaeﬀer, trans. Christine North, and John Dack (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2017), xxii-xxiii.

149

North, “Translator’s Introduction,” xxiii.

150

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 5.

151

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 5.

152

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 62.

3 8

constructs these concepts in order to ﬁt into a linguistic context.” 152

3.2 D ES CRIPTION OF THE M ETHODOLOGY

153

The Sonic Identity Model can be viewed on two levels: representational and operational. On a

154

representational level, the Model serves as a descriptive tool for describing the environment, its

On an

sounds and, perhaps most importantly, listener relationships to the sonic environment.

155

operational level, the Model serves as a tool for re-approaching, designing and/or managing sonic

environments.

3.2.1 T HE S ONIC I DENTITY M ODEL AS A DESCRIPTIVE TOOL

On a representational or descriptive level, researchers may follow approaches one to three of the

Sonic Identity Model to approach the sonic identity of a city. These three approaches are as follows:

Approach One: Sonic Memory — Selection of Representative Examples;

Approach Two: Sonic Perception — Constitution of an Analytical Framework; and

Approach Three: Sonic Interpretation — Characterisation of the Sonic Identity of a City.

Outlined below is a descriptive narrative of how these three approaches are carried out by a

researcher. The purpose of this summary is to provide the reader with a picture of how the

methodology is intended to unfold in application, and the small steps and processes within each

approach. This description does not include detail on methods and conceptual tools within each

approach; this is detailed in 3.4 and 3.5.

156

In approach one, researchers follow the outlined steps to select places that are “representative for

the sonic identity of a city.” Researchers direct 20-50 participants to each use their sonic memory

to draw Sonic Mind Maps (see 3.4.1) of the city. This method is followed by the Phono-reputable

Inquiry technique (see 3.4.2), where researchers draw upon the developed Sonic Mind Maps and

conduct reﬂexive survey sessions with knowledgeable participants. Researchers then analyse the

results through the CVS Model (see 3.5.1), determining to what degree each described place in a

city is “Known,” “Lived” and “Sensed.” Researchers then use the CVS Model as a control

instrument to make a ﬁnal selection of representative places, which become the representative sites

for understanding the sonic identity of the city going forward.

In approach two, researchers work with participants to understand perceptions of the selected

153

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 60.

154

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

155

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 79.

156

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 63.

3 9

representative places and more broadly the city. Researchers develop “recordist forms” for each

place that specify locations, Sonic Composition information (see 3.5.2), intention and factual

information as expressed by participants in approach one. Each place is then recorded and acoustic

measurements are conducted. Researchers assemble the recordings into short “sonic fragments”

for use as listening materials in Re-activated Listening Interviews (see 3.4.3). After the interviews,

researchers conduct a ﬁrst analysis of the results from each interview using the Chart of Sequential

Analysis. Approach two may be skipped in limited studies.

In the third and ﬁnal approach researchers characterise the sonic identity of the city through use of

the Sonic Identity Chart. Researchers use the Sonic Identity Chart to compile, synthesise, analyse

and describe several sonic qualities of each place’s sonic environment. As per section one of the

chart, “speciﬁcations of the sequences,” researchers describe factual information: sound levels

(from acoustic measurements), interview reception (diﬃculty/ease), sonic fragment descriptions and

Sonic Eﬀects (see 3.5.3). In section two, “synthesis of the hypotheses and comments,” researchers

analyse and describe Re-activated Listening Interview results (summarised in Charts of Sequential

Analysis in approach two) in terms of space, time, semantic and/or cultural aspects, and sonic

material. In section three, “semantic niche and remarkable expressions,” researchers include short

quotations from participants. In section four, “objectiﬁcation of the qualitative criteria,” researchers

use the EMP Model (see 3.5.4) to analyse results and name Environment, Milieu and Landscape

criteria of each place using its Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria.

Through approaches one to three, researchers have collected data from participants out of context,

analysed the results through conceptual tools and, for each place studied, determined:

To what degree the sonic environment is Known, Lived and Sensed;

The Sonic Composition of each sonic environment;

Positive and negative participant views towards sounds;

Listener associations towards sounds;

Objective sound level measurements;

Participant perceptions of space, time, semantic and/or cultural aspects and sonic material;

Sonic Eﬀects experienced by participants;

Remarkable expressions about the sonic environment; and

Qualitative Criteria regarding acoustic quality, sonic comfort and aesthetic quality.

Following approaches one to three, researchers conclude their analysis and may attempt to

“approach” the sonic identity of the city. The Model is a “guide” that oﬀers no recipe or results.

Accordingly it does not provide a conclusive, deterministic result. It is open-ended and the potential

4 0

outcomes from data collection and analysis are not speciﬁed.

3.2.2 T HE S ONIC I DENTITY M ODEL AS AN OPE RATIVE TO OL

On an operative level, Amphoux calls for analysts, managers and designers to use the Sonic Identity

157

Model as a tool to jointly address and manage the Environment, Milieu and Landscape dimensions

of the Sonic World. Amphoux outlines three “plans of action” for doing so: handling of the

Environment (defensive approach), handling the Milieu (oﬀensive approach) and handling the

Landscape (creative approach).

158

To eﬀectively manage the sonic environment Amphoux states practitioners must engage in each of

these defensive, oﬀensive and creative approaches equally and “ﬁght on all fronts.” In doing so,

159

practitioners may examine the sonic identity criteria developed by using the Model on a descriptive

level and “consider or authorise new ways of doing things.” Amphoux outlines a number of

practical ways for carrying out this management:

Acoustics and environmental noise management techniques of sound control, mitigation

and abatement (defensive handling of the Environment);

Protecting the spatial and temporal acoustic qualities, and the social and cultural qualities

that constitute the sonic identity of a place (defensive handling of the Environment);

Political regulation of social communication and prevention of social conﬂicts — e.g. noise

complaints (oﬀensive handling of the Milieu);

Raising public awareness regarding sound (oﬀensive handling of the Milieu);

The development of a discipline called “urban sonic design” a sonic equivalence of lighting

design (creative handling of the Landscape); and

The stimulation of public consciousness on the richness of the sonic environment and its

160

qualities through the development of urban sonic recordings, sonic expositions and

157

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 8; Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European

Cities,” 77-78.

158

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 44.

159

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

160

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 77-80.

4 1

manifestations (creative handling of the Landscape).

REPRESENTATIVE LEVEL

OPERATIVE LEVEL

a i r e t i r

a i r e t i r c e v i t a t i l

C e v i t a t i l

)

a u Q

a u q f o n o i t a c ﬁ i t c e b o

f o e r i o t r e p e R &

h c a o r p p a e v i t a e r c

(

t n e m e g a n a m e p a c s d n a L

l e d o M P M E

: t r a h C y t i t n e d

y t l u c ﬁ f i

)

s e v e l

s t c e

f f

I c n o S

1 . 4 . 3

s n o s s e r p x e e b a k r a m e r & e h c n c i t n a m e s : t r a h C y t i t n e d

4 . 3

E c n o S

t n e m e g a n a m u e

I c n o S

s t n e m g a r f c n o s f

i l i

s t c e p s a l a r u t l u c r o / d n a c i t n a m e S

a i r e t a m c n o S

e c a p S

e m T

d / e s a e w e v r e t n i f o

f o t s

h c a o r p p a e v s n e ﬀ o

M

(

.

s t n e m m o c & s e s e h t o p y h e h t f o s s e h t n y s : t r a h C y t i t n e d

3 3

) s

d n u o s f o n o i t p i r c s e d

l i

2 3

c n o S

s s y a n A

n o i t i n g o c e R

l a u t c a F

n o i t p i r c s e D

i l c i t a m e t s y S

s e c n e u q e s e h t f o n o i t a c ﬁ c e p s : t r a h C y t i t n e d

)

.

2 3

a t e d s u o e n a

s w e v r e t n

l l

1 3

c n o S

a i t n e u q e S

e c s m

t n e m e g a n a m

.

1 3

f o t r a h C

, e b a t e m

h c a o r p p a e v s n e f e d

(

.

4 2

y b m e s s A k c a r T & s t n e m e r u s a e M c i t s u o c A

t n e m n o r i v n E

) n o i t a s i r o g e t a c d n u o s n o i t i s o p m o C c n o S

) s n o s s e r p x e e b a k r a m e r & a i r e t i r c e v i t a t i l

g n n e t s L d e t a v i t c a - e R

e d o M

a u q

.

)

3 2

g n d r o c e R e t i S

d e s n e S

( n o i t n e t n

i t g n d r o c e r ( n o i t a m r o n

( n o i t i s o p m o C

n o i t a m r o n i n o i t a c o L

.

2 2

d e v L

1 2

m r o F t s d r o c e R

s e i r i u q n

1 . 2

n w o n K

(

S V C

3 . 1

I

I e b a t u p e r - o n o h P

2 . 1

s p a M d n M c n o S

N O T C A F O S N A L P

3 H C A O R P P A

2 H C A O R P P A

1 . 1

1 H C A O R P P A

Figure 6: Diagram of Pascal Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model

This diagram displays the three chronological approaches and key steps of the Sonic Identity Model. Steps are numbered as per Pascal Amphoux’s publication, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes.

4 2

3.3 GU IDING PRINCIPLES

Three principles underpin the Sonic Identity Model: its holistic perspective towards the urban sonic

environment, its ternary logic, and its principle of recurrence and related intersubjective approach.

161

“Sonic World” Perspective

162

Amphoux takes an holistic perspective towards the “Sonic World,” understanding sound through

163

the way in which it is known, experienced and perceived. He considers sound phenomena as

164

inseparable from their context. Through this perspective “we do not try to describe the sound

world by itself but rather the relationship we have with it.”

Rather than aligning the Model with the technical energy transfer approaches of environmental noise

management or the aesthetic, musicological or ethnomusicological approaches of soundscape

165

studies, Amphoux positions the Sonic Identity Model apart, describing it as an “anthropology of the

166

sound.” In addition to understanding sounds by their source and propagation conditions,

Amphoux considers sound dynamism and the architectural, social and cultural dimensions.

Ternary Logic

What I’m interested in is the ‘AND.’ If you build your thinking in a ternary way, the ideas can navigate — Pascal Amphoux. 167

Amphoux approaches the sonic environment through a ternary logic that guides the structure of the

Model and its conceptual tools. The Sonic Composition tool, CVS Model and EMP Model each

comprise three dimensions, orders or modalities through which practitioners may apprehend the

168

Sound World. This ternary logic is fundamental to Amphoux’s work. Amphoux describes it as a way

161

Amphoux uses “Sonic World” to refer to the sonic environment from a universal perspective.

162

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 130.

163

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

164

Kytö, Rémy, Uimonen, Acquier, Bérubé, Chelkoﬀ, Gamal Said, et al., European Acoustic Heritage,

37.

165

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 6.

166

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 77; Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of

Urban Space,” 130.

167

Pascal Amphoux, “Environment, Milieu, Landscape (Re)deﬁnitions,” trans. Sophie Provost

(conference presentation, CRESSON Winter School, Grenoble, France, 28 January, 2019), https:// ehas.hypotheses.org/3551.

168

Amphoux, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 14 October, 2019.

4 3

to escape binary oppositions — of good and bad, objective and subjective, positive and negative.

Recurrence and Intersubjectivity

The Model is rooted in the principle of recurrence, which Amphoux has applied in all of his work. It

169

was inscribed as the “connotative approach” and later formalised as a technique called “recurrent

observation.” Writing on the “principle of recurrence” in English is very limited.

The principle takes an “intersubjective” approach to reach a degree of objectivity in the study of the

170

sonic environment. Intersubjectivity serves to operate between subjective and objective approaches

and to question the connection between two perspectives that are usually opposed. It provides a

way to conform subjective participant perspectives towards the sonic environment, quantify and

objectify the sonic environment, and reach a “shared objectivity.” However, this shared objectivity is

never absolute; Amphoux states there is no such thing as objectivity in the sonic environment. 171

169

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

170

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 133.

171

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

172

Thibaud, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 2 February, 2019.

4 4

This intersubjective approach is applied across much of CRESSON’s research. 172

3.4 AI MS

Shifting Attitudes

Amphoux aims to shift the negative “diagnosing the bad” attitude that dominates acoustics and

environmental noise management, calling for practitioners to value the technical, social and

sensitive (Environment, Milieu and Landscape) dimensions of the sonic environment equally. 173

Amphoux acknowledges the relevance and value of defensive approaches for understanding the

technical aspects of sound, but underlines the need for practitioners to also embrace the spatial,

temporal, social and cultural dimensions of the sonic environment. The Model encourages oﬀensive

174

and creative approaches, and seeks to promote favourable conditions and document the “points

blancs” rather than the “point noirs” — the unproblematic rather than the problematic.

A Complementary and Interdisciplinary Tool

Positioned between environmental noise management and soundscape studies (in a similar vein to

current urban soundscape design approaches), Amphoux presents the Model as a complementary

tool for expanding the range of approaches in each ﬁeld, stating the methods and tools within the

Model are applicable in local noise studies and comparative analyses of cities. The Model aims to

provide a solution for the “deﬁciency” of interdisciplinary tools — the fundamental problem that

CRESSON has sought to address since its establishment.

Linking Research and Practice

175

One of Amphoux’s primary aims in developing the Sonic Identity methodology is to link design

176

177

practice and research. Amphoux states the Model oﬀers a “transversal and interdisciplinary

method of analysis” that demonstrates “a passage between ‘research’ and ‘practice.’”

Amphoux’s organisation of the Model through two levels of information (representative and

operative) serves this aim. By presenting the Model through these two levels Amphoux attempts to

connect what he describes as the separate domains of description and creation — “description”

178

being the literary activity of scientists and “creation” being the artistic activity of designers or

artists. The repertoires of concepts operating within the Model are intended to be usable in both

173

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 144.

174

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 77.

175

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 143.

176

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 4.

177

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 4.

178

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

4 5

research and practice contexts, for sonic environment analysis, management and creation.

3.5 M E THODS FOR DATA COLLECTION

The principle of recurrence, which underpins the Sonic Identity Model, operates from the

179

assumption “that any method, technique or modality of observation, listening or investigation oﬀers

advantages and disadvantages, [and] reveals things but hides others.” Accordingly, the Model

uses three key methods for data collection to reveal diﬀerent dimensions and qualities of the Sonic

World. In addition to the subjective methods outlined below, Amphoux recommends researchers

also collect objective acoustic measurements of the environments under investigation.

3.5.1 S ONIC MIND MAP S

Amphoux’s Sonic Mind Map method involves 20-50 participants drawing their sonic memory of a

180

city or place. Maps may detail a number of things, including but not limited to sound sources,

locations, streets and buildings, urban routes and daily routines. Each participant draws a sonic

181

map of the city with short comments, guided by researchers where necessary, and speciﬁes a

certain number of places they ﬁnd particularly rich in acoustic qualities. This method is ﬂexible;

practitioners may adapt the scale of data collection (number of participants) and the amount of time

spent developing each map.

182

183

Amphoux describes Sonic Mind Maps as an “eﬀective way to transgress the inherent diﬃculty in

representing sound.” The participant is asked to draw what cannot be drawn — sound. To do

184

so, the participant hesitates between the act of cartographic representation and the desire to

express lived sound phenomena. The maps present a “gap” between the drawing and the

comments. This gap is revealing, and allows for analysis and interpretation by researchers. 185

186

The Sonic Mind Map technique developed from cognitive mental mapping, and is based upon

research by urban planner Kevin Lynch in the 1960s. Amphoux notes that mental maps are well

187

known in human geography. The mental map method is “disﬁgured and adapted” to the sonic

environment in the Sonic Identity Model. When used to study sound, mental mapping proves

179

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

180

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 53-54.

181

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 63.

182

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 11.

183

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 11.

184

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 11.

185

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 12.

186

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 12; Solène Marry, “Assessment of Urban Soundscapes,” Organised Sound 16, no. 3 (2011): 248, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355771811000252. See Kevin Lynch, The Image of The City (MIT Press, 1960).

187

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 11.

4 6

particularly interesting for analysing sonic space conceptualisation, spatial representation, and

188

localisation. Amphoux’s use of sound mapping bears similarities to mapping techniques

189

developed by the World Soundscape Project and ﬁrst used in the project “The Vancouver

Soundscape,” published in 1978.

190

Sonic Mind Maps are just one type of sound map. Sound maps — “spatial diagrams or

cartographical representations that adopt sound as their thematic object” — are a form of

191

thematic cartography that involve “making careful decisions about what to show and how to show

it.” In Peter Tschirhart’s thesis Sound Maps and the Representation of Audible Space, he

examines sound mapping methods and identiﬁes ﬁve types of urban sound maps: grid maps, ﬁeld

maps, soundwalk maps, territory maps and dynamic maps. Amphoux’s approach may be

192

categorised as a ﬁeld map; that is, a map that links “either subjective or empirical sound data to the

life and activities of a particular community.” Field maps “take any number of visual forms: they

might have arrows, representing the approach of incoming sounds; they might include sound

193

contours, suggesting diﬀerent thresholds of perception; they might also locate a signiﬁcant sound

within a community, identifying where it can be heard or the object making it.” Milena Droumeva

describes this form of sound mapping further. She classiﬁes visual-focused sound maps as “graphic

194

soundmaps” — visual representations of sound typologies, audible characteristics and spatial

relationships between sounds that do not include audio.

Samuel Thulin states that sound maps “bring together visual and sonic epistemologies and

195

practices [and] oﬀer rich ground for exploring how representations of time and space are performed

between and across the senses.” Tschirhart suggests that sound maps bridge material and

experiential forms of analysis, and perform a “metaphorical exchange [through] the transformation of

196

lines, dots, ﬁelds, arrows, gradients, and numbers into representations of sound, action, direction,

188

Marry, “Assessment of Urban Soundscapes,” 248; Solène Marry, “Ordinary Public Space: Sound Perception Parameters in Urban Public Spaces and Sonic Representations Associated with Urban Forms,” Sound Eﬀects 2, no. 1 (2012): 176.

189

R. Murray Schafer, ed., The Vancouver Soundscape (Vancouver: World Soundscape Project, Simon

Fraser University, 1978).

190

Peter Tschirhart, “Sound Maps and the Representation of Audible Space,” (PhD thesis, University

of Virginia, 2013), 20.

191

Tschirhart, “Sound Maps,” 16.

192

Tschirhart, “Sound Maps,” 89-90.

193

Tschirhart, “Sound Maps,” 90.

194

Milena Droumeva, “Soundmapping as Critical Cartography: Engaging Publics in Listening to the

Environment,” Communication and the Public 2, no. 4 (2017): 341, https://doi.org/ 10.1177/2057047317719469.

195

Samuel Thulin, “Sound Maps Matter: Expanding Cartophony,” Social & Cultural Geography 19, no.

2 (2018): 193, https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2016.1266028.

196

Tschirhart, “Sound Maps,” 10-11.

4 7

and movement.”

3.5.2 PH ONO-RE PUTAB LE INQU I RIES

197

The Phono-reputable Inquiry method focuses on the sonic qualities and reputations of places in the

city identiﬁed in the Sonic Mind Maps. This technique involves reﬂexive survey sessions with

198

participants to activate memories, current or past, regarding the sonic environment of places within

the city. Working from Sonic Mind Maps developed prior, experts, city specialists and users reﬂect

upon the sonic qualities of representative mapped places, and reﬂect on and propose sonic criteria

that contribute to experiences of well-being. From the commentary collected, researchers

extrapolate relevant criteria about the sonic environment.

199

The method draws upon techniques developed in sociology and political science. Amphoux cites

Floyd Hunter’s work in communication studies in the 1950s.

3.5.3 RE -ACTI VATED LISTEN I NG INTERVIEWS

Re-activated Listening Interviews involve the reactivation of ordinary listening out of context.

Interview participants hear audio fragments developed by the research team and are asked to react

to and describe the situations heard, their associations and interpretations of the sounds, and their

positive and negative views towards the fragments. Following interviews, researchers analyse

responses using one Chart of Sequential Analysis per participant.

This method places an intermediate distance between listeners and sonic environments. Amphoux

describes it as placing a “listener in an internal and external listening position at the same time.” 200

201

Listener responses are linked to “the gap between the real [environment] and its recorded

representation.”

The aim of this method is to develop an intersubjective understanding of participant responses to

the sonic environments, through which the sonic perception of the selected places and the broader

city can be understood. The method was developed in 1979 by Jean-François Augoyard and draws

202

upon observation techniques developed by researchers such as Gregory Bateson at the Palo Alto

197

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 13-14.

198

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 13-14.

199

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 13.

200

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 25.

201

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 25.

202

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 25; David Paquette, and Andra McCartney,

“Research in Brief: Soundwalking and the Bodily Exploration of Places,” Canadian Journal of Communication 37, no. 1 (2012): 140.

4 8

School.

3.6 C ONCEPTUAL TOOLS FOR ANALYSIS

The methodology operates from two ternary concepts and two extensive repertoires of concepts.

These tools are used to analyse the results obtained from data collection methods described in 3.5.

3.6.1 CVS MO DE L

The CVS Model is utilised in approach one of the Model to distinguish the sonic identity of each

203

place under investigation by indicating the dominant dimension(s) present according to its three

poles: “Known,” “Lived” and “Sensed” (Connu, Vècu and Sensible). Each dimension is always

present to a degree, though one may dominate. 204

205

“C,” or Known, refers to the sonic dimension of “symbolic representation,” well known to all,

local or foreign. This order immediately represents the city.

206

“V,” or Lived, refers to the sonic dimension of “indicative expression,” revealed through

contiguity and by people’s practice. It is developed through individual experience.

207

“S,” or Sensed, refers to the sonic dimension of “iconic representation,” deﬁned as the “proper

quality of sound.” It symbolises “the essence of a place, which is totally identiﬁed.” 208

Researchers use the CVS Model as a control instrument to select a balanced number of

representative places from each dominating dimension. It is unclear what theories or approaches

the CVS Model developed out of, though Amphoux notes that prior to the Sonic Identity Model the

CVS Model appeared upstream in anthropological research into “the prospective and the evolution

of lifestyles.” 209

3.6.2 S ONIC COMP OSITION T OO L

The Sonic Composition tool, used in approach two of the Model presents a system for discerning

and subdividing the sonic environment into three orders (Background, Ambience, Signal) by

210

considering listening behaviour and the spatial and temporal aspects of sound in the

203

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 64.

204

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 65-66.

205

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 64.

206

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 64.

207

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 64.

208

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 64.

209

Amphoux, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 14 October, 2019.

210

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 67.

4 9

environment. Its three orders of sound, deﬁned below, correlate to three of Pierre Schaeﬀer’s four

211

listening modes. Amphoux does not explicitly label this categorisation tool but describes each

212

order of sound in the Sonic Identity Model. Hellström describes it as a conceptual tool for

distinguishing sonic environmental characteristics. The term “Sonic Composition” is used here to

refer to this tool.

Schaeﬀer’s Listening Modes

Amphoux’s Sonic Composition orders

— R E L AT E S T O —

213

“Sonic Background” refers to the order of sound we do not pay attention to, often characterised through continuity and/or duration.

“Hearing” concerns the process of aural perception — simply, to hear. It is a passive act, where sounds are heard without reaching out for 216

them.

— R E L AT E S T O —

“Attending” concerns the understanding of sound and the qualities and meanings of such sounds. To attend is to select and 217

“Sonic Ambience” refers to the order of sound that gives a place its distinctive character, often characterised through movement 214 and/or rhythm.

understand.

— R E L AT E S T O —

“Listening” concerns the relationship between the sound event and the sound source. Listening is to lend the ear, to focus on the “sound character,” 218 beyond the immediate sound itself.

"Sonic Signal” refers to the order of sound that we do not have to listen for; they grab your attention unexpectedly. They are always a discontinuity — the order of the sonic event makes you listen.

215

Table 1: Sonic Composition Tool

This table summarises Amphoux's three Sonic Composition orders and the relations between each order and Pierre Schaeﬀer’s listening modes.

When developing “recordist forms” in approach three to guide the audio recording of places under

investigation, researchers use the Sonic Composition tool to categorise sounds in each place. A site

may possess a great degree of Background, Ambience or Signal sounds. The dominating order

211

Hellström, Noise Design, 77. Note that Schaeﬀer’s fourth listening mode, “understanding" or “ouîr,"

is not referred to in the Sonic Identity Model.

212

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 67.

213

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 67-68.

214

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 67-68.

215

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 68.

216

Pierre Schaeﬀer, Treatise on Musical Objects: An Essay Across Disciplines, trans. Christine North

and John Dack (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2017), 76-77.

217

Schaeﬀer, Treatise on Musical Objects, 78-79, 83.

218

Hellström, Noise Design, 72, 74-76.

5 0

indicates which correlating mode of listening may be triggered by the sonic environment, or vice

219

versa. In understanding the sonic Background, Ambience and Signal sounds in an environment,

220

we can understand — to a degree — the global perception of that environment.

The shift between the diﬀerent ‘modes of sonic perception’ (listening, hearing and attending) and the diﬀerent ‘sonic environmental characteristics’ (sonic signals, sonic background and sonic ambience) implies a dynamic act that is both intentionally and unintentionally triggered. Sometimes it is the environment — through certain sonic environmental characteristics — that activates the perceiving subject. And sometimes it is the subject — through a certain listening mode — that activates the environment.

Amphoux states that the ternary tool subverts the dualist approach of gestalt psychology, where the

binary ﬁgure/ground (or background/foreground) theory dominates. Through introducing the third

221

intermediate category of “Ambience” between Background sounds and Signal sounds, Amphoux

emphasises context. It is important to clarify here that Amphoux’s concept of Ambience is

222

diﬀerent, but nevertheless complementary and compatible, to that of Jean-Paul Thibaud, a fellow

researcher at CRESSON. Amphoux outlines the diﬀerence: in Thibaud’s concept of “ordinary

ambience” there cannot be no ambience, whereas for Amphoux there can only be an extraordinary

ambience. Amphoux states that Thibaud’s “ordinary ambience…is nothing else than what I call the

background sounds, (i.e. all the sounds I don’t hear because I am in action and inside it).” 223

3.6.3 S ONIC E FFE CTS

The Sonic Eﬀect notion is CRESSON’s most well-known research output, and was developed

independently to the Sonic Identity methodology. It is an extension of Augoyard’s thesis, Step by

Step: Everyday Walks in a French Urban Housing Project, and was realised through 10 years of

development by the small, multi-disciplinary team that established CRESSON. The concept was ﬁrst

published in French in 1995, and later published in English in 2005 as the book Sonic Experience: a

Guide to Everyday Sounds.

224

The English repertoire of Sonic Eﬀects is a lexicon of some 83 terms for practitioners to consider the

sonic environment as “an object of description, or as an object of transformation.” It is a generic

225

tool for describing a sound in its totality, “from its input to its physical, social and perceptual impact

in urban space.” Of the 83 Eﬀects, there are 16 major Eﬀects that primarily depend on spatial

219

Hellström, Noise Design, 77.

220

Hellström, Noise Design, 77.

221

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 21.

222

Amphoux, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 14 October, 2019.

223

Amphoux, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 14 October, 2019.

224

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 4.

225

Hellström, Noise Design, 100.

5 1

context, which are described in great detail from 6 domain perspectives: physical and applied

acoustics, architecture and urbanism, sociology and everyday culture, musical aesthetics,

psychology and physiology of perception, and textual and media expressions.

Elementary Eﬀects

Compositional Eﬀects

Mnemo- perceptive Eﬀects

Psychomotor Eﬀects

Semantic Eﬀects

Electroacoustic Eﬀects

Colouring

Accelerando

Attraction

Delocalisation

Chorus

Anamnesis

Delay

Blurring

Anticipation

Chain

Dilation

Compression

Distortion

Coupling

Asyndeton

Deburau

Envelopment

Expansion

Dullness

Crescendo

Cocktail

Desynchronisation

Fade

Imitation

Echo

Crossfade

Delocalisation

Incursion

Narrowing

Feedback

Erasure

Intrusion

Perdition

Flange

Cut Out

Filtration Flutter Echo

Descrescendo Hyperlocalisation

Lombard

Quotation

Fuzz

Haas

Immersion

Harmonization

Doppler

Niche

Repetition

Phonotonie

Larsen

Resonance

Metamorphosis

Sharawadji

Drone

Emergence

Phonomnesis

Repulsion

Suspension

Limitation

Reverberation

Synchronisation

Noise-Gate

Remanence

Mask

Mixing

Phase

Synecdoche

Rallentendo

Print-Through

Ubiquity

Wall

Release

Rumble

Reprise

Tremolo

Tartini

Vibrato

Telephone

Wha-Wha

Wobble

Wave

Wow

Uncategorised:

Digression

Decontextualisation

226

Table 2: Sonic Effects Tool

This table displays Augoyard & Torgue’s thematic categorisation of Sonic Eﬀects. Major Eﬀects are identiﬁed in bold. An additional Eﬀect (Metabolic) not included in the English publication was presented in English by Hellström in “Noise Design.”

227

Sonic Eﬀects function as an intermediate link between disciplines. It is described by Augoyard &

Torgue as particularly useful in the ﬁelds of social sciences, urban studies and applied acoustics. 228

Similarly to the Sonic Identity Model, the Sonic Eﬀect paradigm serves to address the “deﬁciency of

226

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, vii-viii.

227

Hellström, Noise Design, 100.

228

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 7.

5 2

tools” problem that CRESSON attempts to resolve through its intended applicability in urban

229

contexts and its “capacity to integrate dimensions beyond aesthetic design.” The Sonic Eﬀect

has ﬁve main established uses: it is a tool for assisting acoustical measurement, a multidisciplinary

instrument for the analysis of complex sound situations, a tool for assisting representation, a tool for

architectural and urban intervention, and an educational tool for serving the general experience of

listening. 230

In approach three of the Sonic Identity Model, Sonic Eﬀects serve as an analytical tool for

231

extrapolating and systematically listing Sonic Eﬀects from Re-activated Listening Interview

229

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 7.

230

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 11-13.

231

Hellström, Noise Design, 100.

5 3

results.

3.6.4 EMP MO DE L & THE RE P E RTOIRE OF QUALITATIVE CRITE RIA

232

The EMP Model presents three ways to qualify the sonic environment: Environment, Milieu and

233

Landscape. Amphoux hypothesises these modalities are the three universal dimensions of sonic

experience. The dimensions are not opposable and only make sense in relation to one another. 234

Environment

Milieu

Landscape

The Environment modality refers to the “set of objective, measurable and controllable facts of the

The Landscape modality refers to the “set of phenomena that allow a sensitive, aesthetic and diﬀered appreciation of

235

Sonic World.”

the sonic world.”

238

Acoustic qualities are “objectiﬁed, evaluated or

Amphoux describes it as aesthetic, subjective and

236

239

manipulated.”

The Milieu modality refers to the “set of intense, natural and vivid relations” expressed 237 through social practices, habits and activity. It focuses on comfort/ discomfort in the sonic environment.

universal.

representational

expressive

perceptual

Relation

environmental

milieu

landscape

physical, spatial, semantic

pragmatic social

cultural

Listening mode Context in focus

objective

subjective

intersubjective

Evaluation

“quality” criteria

“qualiﬁcation” criteria

“qualitativeness” criteria

Qualitative Criteria

Table 3: EMP Model

This table summarises the deﬁnitions of each EMP Model modality — Environment, Milieu and Landscape. As a ternary concept, each modality relates to the next.

The EMP Model is utilised in approach three of the Sonic Identity Model to identify Environment,

Milieu and Landscape criteria for each place. Each dimension of the EMP Model expresses qualities

for apprehending the sonic environment on an objective, subjective and intersubjective level.

232

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 133.

233

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 136.

234

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 73.

235

Practitioners use the Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria, the second extensive concept that “functions

236

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 37.

237

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 134.

238

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 134.

239

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 135.

5 4

Amphoux, “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space,” 135.

240

as a tool in order to depict the context of sound” to identify Environment, Milieu and Landscape

Criteria. The 75 Qualitative Criteria relate in varying degrees to each modality of the EMP Model and

241

concern “the interaction between a sound perception (or the listener-sound relation) and what

constitutes a more general knowledge of the soundscape (the listener-environment relation).” By

identifying Qualitative Criteria, practitioners may frame a city’s sonic identity through diﬀerent

perspectives.

The EMP Model and its Criteria is constructed and hierarchically organised through a matrix of

242

correlation (see ﬁgure 7 on following page). Each order and its Criteria relate to the next, and only

make sense in relation to one another. Through this fractal structuring, practitioners identify

Criteria. Where they fail to, they can ﬁnd complementary correlations within the same order or

across the related modalities. Criteria are coded by lettering that signal their relationship to each

240

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 74.

241

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 116.

242

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 73.

5 5

EMP order.

eeee

emmm

meem

eeee

eeem

emme

mmme

mmmm

memm

meee

meme

emm

eem

eme

mmm

eee

mee

mem

mme

Orientation

Publicity

Scale

Artiﬁcialisation

Trivialisation

Privatisation

Metropolisation

Collective memory

eeep

emmp

memp

eeep

mmmp

meep

SPATIO-TEMPORAL

EVALUATION

IDEALISATION

SEMANTIC-CULTURAL

empe

empm

eepe

eepm

mepe

mepm

emp

eep

mmp

mep

QUALIFICATION

ENVIRONMENTAL

Atemporality

Naturalisation

Stigmatisation

Naturality / Insecurity

OF MILIEU

QUALITY

empp

eepp

mepp

epme

mpee

epmm

epee

epem

mpme

mpem

mpmm

epm

mpm

epe

mpe

Sonic

Reverberation

Signature

Visualisation

Aesthetisation

SONIC WORLD

mpmp

emep

empp

mpep

IMAGINATION

SONIC MATERIAL

eppe

eppm

epp

mpp

Sonic

Fabrication

Metabolism

eppp

peee

peem

pmee

pmem

pme

pmm

pee

pem

Typicity

Rarity

(sense of-) Internalisation

(sense of-) Belonging

peep

pmep

REPRESENTATIVENESS

EXPRESSIVENESS

pmp

pep

(sense of-) Immersion

Authenticity

QUALITATIVENESS OF LANDSCAPE

ppe

ppm

Schizophony

Symphony

REFLEXIVENESS

ppp

Eidophony

Figure 7: The “Sonic World” and the EMP Model

243

This diagram displays Amphoux’s perspective towards the “Sonic World,” presented through a fractal structuring of its Environment, Milieu and Landscape dimensions. These dimensions comprise the EMP Model. This ﬁgure is borrowed from Hellström’s Noise Design publication and substantially augmented here to include all Qualitative Criteria from the EMP Model. See Appendix 3 for a magniﬁed image.

For Hellström’s presentation of Amphoux’s “Sonic World” triangle see Björn Hellström, Noise Design, 164. 243 For Amphoux’s original presentation of his “Sonic World” triangle see Pascal Amphoux et al., Aux Écoutes de la Ville, 230.

5 6

3.7 S T RUCTU RE

In its simplest form, the Sonic Identity Model is structured through three chronological approaches.

However, the Model’s complexity becomes apparent as the reader comes to understand its

recurrent structure and interrelated ternary concepts.

Recurrent Structure

The Model’s three approaches — Sonic Memory (approach one), Sonic Perception (approach two)

and Sonic Interpretation (approach three) and two ways of working (representative and operative)

are guided by the underpinning principles of recurrence and intersubjectivity. However, this way of

working is not made explicit in Hellström’s interpretation of the Model.

Through the Model’s recurrent structure, each method for data collection serves to capture diﬀerent

dimensions and qualities of the Sonic World. Each conceptual tool progressively reveals these

diﬀerent dimensions and qualities.

Using this recurrent structure practitioners apprehend the sonic identity from a subjective, objective

244

and intersubjective perspective. Practitioners repeatedly revisit, re-enter and re-analyse results,

each time through a diﬀerent conceptual tool for analysis from the Model. Each approach is

connected through processes of circular feedback. This structure is not iterative per se, as the same

steps are not repeated. Rather, practitioners use intersubjectivity to progressively identify and

classify individual participant appreciations and converge results through analysis to reconstruct a

degree of objectivity. Gradually, the overall group appreciation of sound conforms and the personal

nature of sonic identity is apprehended on a general scale. 245

Although the methodology is presented as three chronological approaches, through its recurrent

structure and intersubjective perspective towards the sonic environment the Model is in fact circular

and non-linear. 246

Interrelated Ternary Structures

The Model comprises three ternary conceptual tools that can operate separately and

interdependently: the CVS Model, Sonic Composition tool and EMP Model. The important

interconnections between the various ternary conceptual tools of the Model are not immediately

244

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

245

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 7.

246

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

5 7

clear, but are fundamental to its structure.

The many moving parts within the Sonic Identity Model are presented as individual steps and tools,

in three discrete and chronological approaches. However, the ternary logic underpinning each

conceptual tool draws the CVS Model, Sonic Composition tool and EMP Model together. The tools

are homologous and intrinsically interrelated through their theoretical and methodological

underpinnings; the CVS Model's Known, Lived and Sensed dimensions of a place are related to the

EMP Model’s Environment, Milieu and Landscape modalities, and the Sonic Composition tool’s

Background, Ambience and Signal orders.

Through the Model’s recurrent structure, practitioners use the Model on a representational or

operational level. Practitioners traverse the Model’s successive and interrelated ternary concepts to

construct a degree of “objectivity” from an intersubjective perspective and gradually approach the

5 8

sonic identity of a city.

CO N CL USION

The Sonic Identity Model is best understood by taking it apart, analysing it, reviewing its component

parts and using it in practice. The limited number of English resources available and the inherent

diﬃculties in understanding French academic writing makes comprehensive understanding of the

Sonic Identity Model diﬃcult. The methodology’s interrelated family of concepts, schematic

language and non-linear structure requires extensive study, analysis and application to understand.

Several terms and conceptual tools in the Model, such as the CVS Model and the EMP Model, use

generalised and broad language that is diﬃcult to understand.

I understand the Sonic Identity Model to be a detailed interdisciplinary urban sonic design approach

for research teams studying urban sonic environments as they are heard, remembered, perceived,

evaluated, experienced and represented by inhabitants out of context. Through the Model’s ternary

conceptual tools of analysis, practitioners use the Model to apprehend the relationship between

listeners and urban sonic environments from a phenomenological and contextualised perspective.

The Sonic Identity Model may be used to document and describe the urban sonic environment, or

to develop action plans to manage and re-design the environment using oﬀensive, defensive and

creative interdisciplinary approaches from related urban sonic design ﬁelds. The Sonic Identity

Model may oﬀer an urban sonic design approach usable in soundscape studies, environmental

noise management and urban soundscape design practices.

Through the Sonic Identity Model, Amphoux aims to link research and design practices, shift sound-

negative attitudes, and provide a complementary and interdisciplinary tool usable in local noise

studies and comparative analyses of cities. These aims speak to current challenges documented by

practitioners in urban sonic design (see chapter 2.3), speciﬁcally regarding the diﬃculties of putting

theory into practice, and interdisciplinary communication. The Sonic Identity Model may serve as a

tool to address these challenges. However, its complexity may make its usability in practice and

across disciplines diﬃcult.

This chapter presented a detailed explanation of the Sonic Identity Model’s guiding principles, aims,

structure, methods and concepts. To better understand its potential use in practice it is necessary to

5 9

investigate how practitioners have applied the Model. This is explored in the next chapter.

4 C H A P T E R

THE SONIC IDENTITY M ODE L: PRACTI TIONER APPLI CAT IO N

In chapter 3 I investigated Amphoux’s Sonic Identity methodology, with a focus on its methods and

conceptual tools. In chapter 4 I investigate its use in practice to answer the following research

question:

How have practitioners applied Pascal Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model?

In this chapter I present a high-level review of practitioners who have reported on their use of the

Sonic Identity Model in English over the last 27 years, since Amphoux’s French publication in 1993.

I investigate ﬁve case studies in detail, examining practitioner applications of the Model against

Amphoux’s directives for use. I individually examine each case study in relation to practitioner uses

of the Model and compare and contrast how practitioners have used the Model’s methods for data

collection and conceptual tools for analysis. I conclude with an evaluation of the usefulness of the

6 0

Sonic Identity Model as reported by practitioners.

4.1 OV ERVIEW OF MODEL APPLICATION

From chapter 3 we understand that the Sonic Identity Model is intended to be used by any

practitioner working with the sonic environment (see chapter 3.1.1). Practitioners may apply the

Model as a descriptive tool to study urban sonic environments or as an operative tool to design and/

or manage them (see chapter 3.2).

247

Amphoux states that practitioners may use the Model according to their needs, knowledge and

reference culture. Practitioners may apply the Model on a large city-wide scale as intended.

248

Alternatively, Amphoux states that practitioners may skip parts in limited studies to use the Model

249

on a smaller local scale. Amphoux also encourages practitioners to use the Model as a

complementary tool alongside other methods and approaches, such as noise maps.

Although the Model is presented as a chronological manual of three approaches for practitioners to

250

follow, Amphoux notes that the non-linear and circular recurrent structure that underpins the

251

methodology (see chapter 3.7) prohibits “a systematic application.” As a result the Model “cannot

252

be used mechanically.” When it comes to application, Amphoux states “it will always be

necessary to make a[n] eﬀort to implement it.” Accordingly, practitioners may need to scale,

adapt and augment the Sonic Identity Model to apply it in practice.

253

Over the past 27 years the Sonic Identity Model has been engaged with by French researchers and

254

practitioners. The Model was applied in its entirety by Pascal Amphoux himself in Aux Écoutes de

However, there are limited examples

la Ville in 1991 to three cities: Lausanne, Locarno and Zürich.

of Sonic Identity Model use in English. A small number of practitioners have drawn on the “sonic

247

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 5.

248

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 66.

249

Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 77.

250

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

251

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

252

Amphoux, interview by Björn Hellström, 6 September, 2000.

253

Amphoux, interview by Sophie Gleeson, 14 October, 2019.

254

Amphoux et al., Aux Écoutes de la Ville.

6 1

identity” notion without applying the Model itself, including Ricardo Atienza, Gunnar Cerwén, Nina

255

Hällgren and Vincent Battesti & Nicolas Puig. I am aware of only seven instances where the Sonic

Identity Model has been applied and reported on in English. The diagram below charts practitioner

Major application

Paquette

Barrio & Carles

Hellström

Vogiatzis & Rémy Guiu

Minor application

Karapostoli & Votsi

Cerwen, Battesti & Puig

Atienza

Hällgren

“Sonic identity” concept application

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Figure 8: Practitioner Application of the Sonic Identity Model in English, 1993-2019

At its lowest level the diagram displays 4 research projects that apply the “sonic identity” concept. The higher levels display 7 research projects that use some or all methods and concepts from the Sonic Identity Model.

applications.

David Paquette’s Masters research project investigating the neighbourhood of Commercial Drive,

256

Vancouver, presents a singular case study in which the Sonic Identity Model was applied in its

257

entirety. On a smaller scale the Model was partially applied in Isabel López Barrio & José Carles’

258

study of Madrid; Björn Hellström’s PhD research project investigating Klara, Stockholm;

255

Ricardo Atienza, “L’identité Sonore : une variable essentielle dans la conﬁguration urbaine : étude

pour l'incorporation critique du concept d'identité sonore dans l'élaboration du projet urbain, comme condition à priori d'un lieu” (PhD thesis, l’Université Pierre Mendès France, y la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 2008); Gunnar Cerwén, “Urban Soundscapes: a Quasi-experiment in Landscape Architecture,” Landscape Research 41, no. 5 (2016): 481-494, https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2015.1117062; Nina Hällgren, “Designing with Urban Sound: Exploring Methods for Qualitative Sound Analysis of the Built Environment” (Licentiate thesis, Konstfack University College of Arts, Crafts and Design, 2019); Vincent Battesti, and Nicolas Puig, “‘The Sound of Society:’ a Method for Investigating Sound Perception in Cairo,” The Senses and Society 11, no. 3 (2016): 298-319, https://doi.org/10.1080/17458927.2016.1195112.

256

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment.”

257

Isabel López Barrio, and José Carles, "Acoustic Dimensions of Inhabited Areas: Quality Criteria,”

The Soundscape Newsletter 10 (1995): 6-8.

258

Hellström, Noise Design.

6 2

Konstantinos Vogiatzis & Nicolas Rémy’s study of Herakleion in Crete Island, Greece and Volos and

259

261

Larissa in Greece; Aimilia Karapostoli & Nefta-Eleftheria Votsi’s study of Thessaloniki, Greece; 260

and Claire Guiu & Ciudad Sonora’s study of Barcelona. In each of these reported applications of

the Sonic Identity Model practitioners scaled, adapted and applied the Model in unique ways to suit

project needs. This chapter investigates these practitioner uses of the Model. Guiu’s study is not

examined here due to the limited information available.

ME THO DS

CONCEPTUAL TO OLS

CVS Model

EMP Model

Sonic Mind Maps

Sonic Eﬀects

Phono- reputable Inquiries

Re-activated Listening Interviews

Sonic Composition tool

✖

Paquette

✖

Barrio & Carles

✖ (partial)

Hellström

✖

Vogiatzis & Rémy

✖

Karapostoli & Votsi

✖

✖ (partial)

Guiu

Table 4: Practitioner Application of Sonic Identity Model Methods & Concepts

This table displays the degree to which practitioners applied methods and concepts from the Sonic Identity Model.

4.1.1 B ARRIO & CARLES ’ MIN OR APP LICATION OF THE M ODE L

Barrio & Carles’ study into the acoustic dimensions and sonic identity of Madrid was carried out at

the Psychoacoustics Laboratory of the Institute de Acústica in 1995. Working in collaboration with

259

Konstantinos Vogiatzis, and Nicolas Rémy, “Strategic Noise Mapping of Herakleion: the Aircraft

Noise Impact as a Factor of the Int. Airport Relocation,” Noise Maps 1 (2014): 15-31; Konstantinos Vogiatzis, and Nicolas Rémy, “From Environmental Noise Abatement to Soundscape Creation Through Strategic Noise Mapping in Medium Urban Agglomerations in South Europe,” Science of the Total Environment 482-483 (2013): 420-431.

260

Aimilia Karapostoli, and Nefta-Eleftheria, “Urban Soundscapes in the Historic Centre of

Thessaloniki: Sonic Architecture and Sonic Identity,” Sound Studies 4, no. 2 (2018): 162-177.

261

Claire Guiu, “Listening to the City: the Sonorities of Urban Growth in Barcelona,” in Toward an

Anthropology of Ambient Sound, ed. Christine Guillebaud (London: Routledge, 2017), 168-185.

6 3

researchers at CRESSON, Barrio & Carles applied selected methods and concepts from the Sonic

Identity Model to identify places, situations and contexts that deﬁne Madrid’s acoustic identity and

understand local inhabitants’ perceptual evaluation of these places.

Two data collection methods from the Sonic Identity Model are applied: Sonic Mind Maps and Re-

activated Listening Interviews. One conceptual tool from the Model is applied to support data

analysis: the CVS Model. The project is only reported upon in English in one high-level project

overview and there is limited information available on the researchers’ application of the Model.

4.1.2 HE LLS TR ÖM’S MINOR AP P LICATION OF THE MODEL

Hellström’s 2003 PhD project, Noise Design: Architectural Modelling and the Aesthetics of Urban

Acoustic Space, translates and presents the Sonic Identity Model in English. Hellström uses the

Model to conduct a limited study of the sonic environment of Klara, Stockholm.

Hellström examines audio recordings of nine locations in Klara generated for a previous exhibition

titled “Tigers.” He analyses the audio recordings and extrapolates Sonic Eﬀects and Qualitative

Criteria that concern the spatio-temporal dimensions of sound, drawing from the two most

262

extensive repertoires of concepts in the Sonic Identity Model. Through audio analysis, Hellström

produces a “rough outline of the sonic information” of the neighbourhood under investigation.

4.1.3 PAQ UE TT E’S MAJO R A P P L I CATION OF THE M ODEL

Paquette’s thesis, Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment, was completed in 2004. In the

project Paquette develops a synthesised methodology for analysing and describing the acoustic

community of a neighbourhood. The methodology is based largely upon Amphoux’s Model merged

with aspects of Truax’s Acoustic Communication Model and soundscape studies methods and

techniques developed by Schafer and the World Soundscape Project (see chapter 2.2.2). The

263

methodology is designed to “simultaneously emphasise the particularities (and strengths) of each

approach and the way in which they can interact, theoretically and practically.” Paquette applies

the synthesised methodology in a case study analysis of the neighbourhood Commercial Drive.

Paquette scales the Sonic Identity Model to study a neighbourhood and applies the methodology in

its entirety. The Model’s methods for data collection are supplemented by additional soundscape

methods: sound counts, sound level measurements, soundwalks, listening walks and a sound diary.

The Model’s analysis steps and tools are supported by the use of Truax’s Acoustic Communication

Model to evaluate sonic features, sound signals, sound cycles, and soundscape balance. This leads

to Paquette’s description of the sonic portrait of Commercial Drive. This research project provides

an excellent point of reference for practitioners seeking an in-depth example of comprehensive

262

Hellström, Noise Design, 173-174.

263

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 62.

6 4

model application.

4.1.4 V OGIATZIS & RÉ MY’S MI N OR AP P LICATION OF THE M ODEL

Konstantinos Vogiatzis & Nicolas Rémy carried out two related studies into the sound qualities,

sonic comfort and sonic identity of the cities of Volos and Larissa (2012) and the neighbourhood of

Alikarnassos in Herakleion (2013) in Greece. These studies were part of the larger European

Directive 2002/49/EC — the European assessment and management of environmental noise. The

2012 study presents the ﬁrst applied example of qualitative methods (including methods from the

Sonic Identity Model) used in collaboration with the long-standing quantitative approaches

employed in the European Directive. 264

265

In each study Vogiatzis & Rémy aimed to understand the sound qualities that contribute to each

place’s sonic identity. Vogiatzis & Rémy conduct Phono-reputable Inquiries and cross-analyse the

data with quantitative acoustic measurements, SNM software predictions and noise maps. The

researchers analyse data using the intersubjective approach identiﬁed in the Sonic Identity Model to

reach a degree of objectivity in the results. They use Amphoux’s EMP Model operatively (see

chapter 3.2.2) to make recommendations for managing the Environment, Milieu and Landscape

dimensions of Volos, Larissa and Alikarnassos.

4.1.5 KA RA POST OLI & V OTS I ’ S MINOR APP LICATION OF THE M ODE L

Aimilia Karapostoli & Nefta-Eleftheria Votsi’s study of Thessaloniki in Greece conducted between

2014-2017 presents a case study of partial Sonic Identity Model application. The researchers

266

combined aspects the Model with Schafer’s foreground-background perspective, Bernie Krause’s

sound categorisation system (geophony, anthrophony, biophony) and Lynch’s method of dividing

the city into elements (the same Kevin Lynch that informed Amphoux’s Sonic Mind Map method).

Re-activated Listening Interviews are used in collaboration with additional methods of ﬁeld

recording, site observation, acoustic sound pressure level measurements and the soundscape

studies soundwalking method. To analyse the results, the researchers use Sonic Eﬀects and the

EMP Model conceptual tools in combination with approaches from Schafer and Krause to analyse

264

Vogiatzis, and Rémy, “From Environmental Noise Abatement to Soundscape Creation,” 420.

265

Vogiatzis, and Rémy, “From Environmental Noise Abatement to Soundscape Creation,” 420.

266

See Bernie Krause, “Anatomy of the Soundscape: Evolving Perspectives,” Journal of the Audio

Engineering Society 56, no. 1/2 (2008): 73-80. This approach to understanding the soundscape is fundamental to the emergent area of research and practice termed “soundscape ecology.” See Bryan C. Pijanowski, Almo Farina, Stuart H. Gage, Sarah L. Dumyahn, and Bernie L. Krause, “What is Soundscape Ecology? An Introduction and Overview of an Emerging New Science,” Landscape Ecology 26 (2011): 1213–1232, https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10980-011-9600-8.

6 5

and describe the sonic and architectural characteristics of Thessaloniki.

4.2 M E THODS FOR DATA COLLECTION APPLIED IN

CA SE STU DIE S

4.2.1 S ONIC MIND MAP S

267

In Solène Marry’s review of soundscape assessment methods she notes that, in general, very few

cognitive mapping techniques have been adapted and applied to the sonic environment. This is

not for lack of interest; a number of practitioners in scientiﬁc ﬁelds, sound studies, governmental

268

bodies and artistic practices have developed an interest in mapping techniques, and various types

269

of sound maps are often found in academic publications and regulatory documents. Despite this,

270

there is little critical discourse on sound mapping. Amphoux is one of the few researchers to put

sound mapping into practice. His developed technique of Sonic Mind Maps has been applied in

only two case studies: by Barrio & Carles and Paquette.

Paquette: application of method

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of method

Barrio & Carles: application of method

20-50 diverse participants.

220 diverse participants.

12 diverse participants.

[as per Model]

Participants draw Sonic Mind Maps of the city with comments.

Participants draw Sonic Mind Maps of the neighbourhood.

Participants add remarks (process is not described by researchers).

Researcher guides participants to include short comments and specify areas that are rich in acoustic qualities.

Participants ﬁll in a written questionnaire, answering questions on sound preferences, signiﬁcant sounds and locations, main sound sources, and their relationship to the area.

(Maps developed out of context)

[as per Model]

(Maps developed in situ)

Table 5: Application of Sonic Mind Maps Method in Case Studies

This table compares practitioner uses of Sonic Mind Maps to Amphoux’s directives. Where a step is highlighted it has been scaled, adapted and/or applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s recommendations.

In each study the scale of method application is expanded and reduced respectively, and adapted

by Paquette for in-situ use. Paquette also carries out additional analysis of the maps, examining

267

Marry, “Assessment of Urban Soundscapes,” 248.

268

Tschirhart, “Sound Maps and the Representation of Audible Space,” 73.

269

Tschirhart, “Sound Maps and the Representation of Audible Space,” 73.

270

Marry, “Assessment of Urban Soundscapes,” 248.

6 6

participant choice of sound sources, sound placement and quantity, environment mapping and

iconic representations (e.g. people, architectural features, importance of streets), and identifying

soundmarks (a soundscape studies concept). 271

4.2.2 PH ONO-RE PUTAB LE INQU I RIES

Paquette: application of method

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of method

Vogiatzis & Rémy: application of method

[as per Model]

Diverse participant mix of experts, city specialists and general users.

Local inhabitants — 500 participants across the two studies. Diversity does not appear to be a criteria.

Researcher conducts two to three hour reﬂexive survey sessions with up to six people per session.

Researcher conducts one reﬂexive survey session for two to three hours with ﬁve people.

Researchers conduct reﬂexive survey sessions for unknown durations with unknown group sizes.

Interviews draw upon previously developed Sonic Mind Maps.

Interviews do not draw upon Sonic Mind Maps (not used in study).

Interviews do not draw upon previously developed Sonic Mind Maps. These two methods are carried out separately and compared afterwards.

[as per Model]

Researcher asks questions regarding sonic quality, sonic signatures and acoustic quality criteria that contribute to well- being.

Researchers ask questions regarding noise and annoyance, general sound perception, listener sound evaluation, sound types and location.

[as per Model]

(Interviews conducted out of context)

Interviews are conducted in situ (in 2012 study of Volos and Larissa).

Table 6: Application of Phono-reputable Inquiries Method in Case Studies

This table compares practitioner uses of Phono-reputable Inquiries to Amphoux’s directives. Where a step is highlighted it has been scaled, adapted and/or applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s recommendations.

The Phono-reputable Inquiry method was applied by Paquette largely without adaptation and by

Rémy & Vogiatzis with signiﬁcant adaptation to meet project objectives. Both case studies provide

limited information on the process of carrying out Phono-reputable Inquiries and analysing the

271

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 71-72.

6 7

results.

4.2.3 RE -ACTI VATED LISTEN I NG INTERVIEWS

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of method

Barrio & Carles: application of method

Karapostoli & Votsi: application of method

Paquette: application of method

Participant mix of inhabitants or specialists.

Five specialist participants.

45 inhabitants with some degree of specialisation.

Five participants, mix of inhabitants and specialists.

Researcher conducts ﬁve interviews, using three sound fragments.

Researcher conducts six to 10 interviews lasting two to three hours, using 10 sound fragments.

Researcher conducts 12 interviews for unknown duration, using unknown number of sound fragments

Unknown number of and duration of interviews, unknown number of sound fragments.

[as per Model]

Participants listen to recordings of unknown locations, and react to and describe what is heard.

[as per Model]

(Interviews conducted out of context)

[as per model]

Analysis process does not follow Model.

Analysis process unknown.

Researcher creates and updates one Chart of Sequential Analysis per participant (step 2.4). In each chart the researcher records their initial hypothesis, the participant proﬁle, a condensed interview transcription, remarkable expressions, the participant’s attitude, a free interpretation of the results, and reﬂects upon their initial hypothesis.

Table 7: Application of Re-activated Listening Interviews Method in Case Studies

This table compares practitioner uses of Re-activated Listening Interviews to Amphoux’s directives. Where a step is highlighted it has been scaled, adapted and/or applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s recommendations.

Re-activated Listening Interviews were applied largely unadapted by Barrio & Carles, Paquette, and

Karapostoli & Votsi. Practitioners provide limited detail on the process of conducting interviews and

analysing results. Paquette appears to be the only practitioner to have analysed the results as

6 8

directed by Amphoux.

4.3 C ONCEPTUAL TOOLS FOR ANALYSIS APPLIED IN

CA SE STU DIE S

4.3.1 CVS MO DE L

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of conceptual tool

Barrio & Carles: application of conceptual tool

Paquette: application of conceptual tool

[as per Model]

Researcher analyses Sonic Mind Maps and Phono-reputable Inquiry results.

Researchers analyse only Sonic Mind Maps (Phono-reputable Inquiries not carried out).

[as per Model]

Researcher determines the dominating (Known, Lived, Sensed) dimension present in each place.

[as per Model]

Researcher selects a balanced number of representative places from each dimension.

Researchers select places by context mentioned (11 places selected).

[as per Model]

(Analysis conducted out of context)

Table 8: Application of CVS Model in Case Studies

This table compares practitioner uses of the CVS Model to Amphoux’s directives. Where a step is highlighted it has been scaled, adapted and/or applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s recommendations.

The CVS Model was applied by Barrio & Carles and Paquette as Amphoux intended; as a

6 9

conceptual tool for analysing results.

4.3.2 S ONIC COMP OSITION T OO L

Paquette: application of conceptual tool

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of conceptual tool

[as per Model]

Researcher analyses Sonic Mind Maps, Phono- reputable Inquiry results and Re-activated Listening Interview results.

Researcher categorises sounds described by participants into Background, Ambience and Signal sound orders.

Researcher includes this information in the recordist form to assist the audio recordist in discretely capturing the Background, Ambience and Signal orders in manageable parts.

(Analysis conducted out of context)

Table 9: Application of Sonic Composition Conceptual Tool in Case Studies

This table compares practitioner uses of the Sonic Composition tool to Amphoux’s directives. Where a step is highlighted it has been scaled, adapted and/or applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s recommendations.

As outlined in 4.2.3, Re-activated Listening Interviews were carried out in three case studies. When

following the Sonic Identity Model, this ﬁrst requires practitioners to use the Sonic Composition tool

for the recording and production of sonic fragments to use in the interviews. However only one case

7 0

study has followed these steps and applied the Sonic Composition tool.

4.3.3 S ONIC E FFE CTS

The Sonic Eﬀects conceptual tool was applied in three case studies: by Paquette, Hellström and

Karapostoli & Votsi.

Paquette: application of conceptual tool

Hellström: application of conceptual tool

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of conceptual tool

Karapostoli & Votsi: application of conceptual tool

[as per Model]

Researcher analyses audio recordings.

Researcher analyses Phono-reputable Inquiry results and Re-activated Listening Interview results.

Researchers analyse Re- activated Listening Interview results (Phono- reputable Inquiries not carried out).

Researcher extrapolates and systematically lists the Sonic Eﬀects described by participants in the Sonic Identity Chart.

Researchers extrapolate and describe Sonic Eﬀects described by participants and the sounds and architectural characteristics that generate each Eﬀect.

Researcher extrapolates and systematically lists spatio-temporal Sonic Eﬀects perceived in audio recordings of the environment. Researcher describes the cause and conditions of each Eﬀect present and determines overall dominant Eﬀects in Klara.

[as per Model]

(Analysis conducted out of context)

Table 10: Application of Sonic Effect Conceptual Tool in Case Studies

This table compares practitioner uses of the Sonic Eﬀect tool to Amphoux’s directives. Where a step is highlighted it has been scaled, adapted and/or applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s recommendations.

7 1

4.3.4 EMP MO DE L & THE RE P E RTOIRE OF QUALITATIVE CRITE RIA

Hellström: application of conceptual tool

Rémy & Votiatzis: application of conceptual tool

Karapostoli & Votsi: application of conceptual tool

Paquette: application of conceptual tool

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of conceptual tool

[as per Model]

Researcher analyses audio recordings.

Researcher analyses approaches one and two results for each place investigated.

Researchers analyse Re- activated Listening results and results from other methods outside of Sonic Identity Model.

Researchers do not use Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria in analysis process.

Researcher uses the Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria to identify Environment, Milieu and Landscape Qualitative Criteria in each place and list the results in the Sonic Identity Chart.

As per model. Researcher also provides a detailed written description of Environment, Milieu and Landscape dimensions of each place.

Researchers use the Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria to identify and describe Qualitative Criteria in each place and draw connections between Qualitative Criteria, acoustic characteristics, Sonic Eﬀects and soundmarks.

Researcher uses part of the Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria to identify Environment Qualitative Criteria in each place. Researcher describes the cause and conditions of each criteria present.

[as per Model]

(Analysis conducted out of context)

Table 11: Application of EMP Model in Case Studies

This table compares practitioner uses of the EMP Model to Amphoux’s directives. Where a step is highlighted it has been scaled, adapted and/or applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s recommendations.

The EMP Model is the most applied concept from the Sonic Identity Model. Hellström uses the EMP

Model both as an analytical tool and a creative tool. It is applied creatively in that Hellström

approaches the recordings under investigation as “sonic compositions,” which he, as a listener,

272

actively participates in to interpret and recreate the sonic environment (using the set of criteria and

concepts). Vogiatzis & Rémy do not use the EMP Model to identify Qualitative Criteria. Rather,

they apply the EMP Model operatively to outline multi-level strategies for preserving important sonic

environment qualities, managing activities, rehabilitating inhabitant sound comfort and promoting

soundscape listening. These recommendations follow Amphoux’s three “plans for action” (see

272

Hellström, Noise Design, 199-200.

7 2

chapter 3.2.2).

4.4 R EP ORTED USEFULNESS OF THE SONIC

ID EN T ITY MODEL

Comparison and contrast of the ﬁve case studies reveal insights into the usefulness of the overall

Sonic Identity Model and its methods and conceptual tools.

4.4.1 R EPORT ED USEFULNESS O F M ODEL’S METHODS AND CONCE PTS

Methods for Data Collection

Paquette describes Sonic Mind Maps as a valuable ﬁrst step towards understanding the sonic

273

environment and providing rich “primary information about the sounds and locations of the Drive

which would later prove to be valuable in a general assessment of its acoustic community.” Sonic

274

Mind Maps provided Barrio & Carles with insights into the diverse acoustic situations and contexts

of Madrid, which would not have been revealed solely through noise-based evaluations. The

Sonic Mind Map method is ﬂexible and applicable in both small and large-scale studies. Although

Amphoux intended for practitioners to develop Sonic Mind Maps out of context, Paquette's adapted

use of the method demonstrates its applicability in situ. When used in situ Paquette states the

method equips researchers with a better understanding of the daily life and cycles in the area. 275

276

However, the method is limited in its capacity to generate in-depth information, with Paquette

describing it as a “simplistic” type of assessment.

Phono-reputable Inquiries oﬀer a more in-depth understanding of listener perception than Sonic

Mind Maps, revealing listener attention, personal judgements and soundscape changes over time. 277

The Phono-reputable Inquiries method is useful out of context for investigating listener memory and

in situ for investigating active listener perception. However, it may prove to be problematic for

participants — Paquette noted that the interviews were diﬃcult to carry out as participants found

the “unusual” subject matter of sound diﬃcult to talk about. 278

279

Re-activated Listening Interviews are useful for understanding the strong interrelation between

sound and context and the importance of listener meaning when evaluating sound. The process

of listening to an unknown sound context, out of context, demonstrated local inhabitants’ complex

273

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 71.

274

Barrio, and Carles, “Acoustic Dimensions of Inhabited Areas,” 7.

275

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 71.

276

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 75.

277

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 73, 75.

278

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 72-73.

279

Barrio, and Carles, “Acoustic Dimensions of Inhabited Areas,” 8.

7 3

sonic knowledge, provided a deep understanding of sonic environment criteria shaping listener

280

perception, and ultimately enhanced listener perception. This ﬁnal method for data collection is

not without its challenges; Karapostoli & Votsi noted that Re-activated Listening Interviews

281

sometimes proved diﬃcult for interviewees, who were uncertain about the relationship between

sounds and sonic comfort.

Conceptual Tools for Analysis

The CVS Model has received little attention from practitioners. Paquette notes its use for exploring

282

inhabitant sonic environment relations and understanding how participants express their knowledge

and experience of the sonic environments in the initial stages of investigation.

283

When used to guide the development of audio recordings, the Sonic Composition tool is useful for

capturing recognisable soundscapes, as opposed to realistic sonic environments. The process of

recording an environment’s Background, Ambience and Signal sounds discretely shifts focus away

from objective accuracy and towards recognisability, listener perception and memory.

The EMP Model and Sonic Eﬀects are valuable conceptual tools for expressing relations between

listeners, sounds and the environment. These two extensive repertoires of concepts may be scaled

and applied in part or in full, by a team or an individual. Sonic Eﬀects in particular are useful not only

as a conceptual tool for analysis, but also as a method for in-situ data collection, as demonstrated

by Hellström. Sonic Eﬀects and the EMP Model are useful for understanding inhabitant perceptions

284

and subjective descriptions of the environment based on their values, judgements and sonic

knowledge. Through Rémy & Vogiatzis’ operative use of the EMP Model the researchers also

demonstrate the usefulness of this tool for developing practical recommendations for managing the

sonic environment and supporting city planning and decision-making processes. 285

4.4.2 RE PO RTE D USE FULNE SS OF OVE RALL M ODEL

Research, Design & Education Context

In a research context, the Model proves useful as a descriptive tool for documenting, analysing and

describing the sonic environment for both large-scale investigations with participants and small-

280

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 85, 111, 117.

281

Karapostoli, and Votsi, “Urban Soundscapes in the Historic Centre of Thessaloniki,” 174.

282

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 79-80.

283

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 81.

284

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 122.

285

Vogiatzis, and Rémy, “From Environmental Noise Abatement to Soundscape Creation,” 431;

Vogiatzis, and Rémy, “Strategic Noise Mapping of Herakleion,” 30.

7 4

scale individual practitioner research. Hellström’s limited study demonstrates the potential value of

286

select concepts (the EMP Model and Sonic Eﬀect notion) as creative tools, with which practitioners

may use to compose with in a creative design context.

Hellström’s and Paquette’s studies demonstrate the Model’s potential educational use. Paquette

287

notes that Sonic Mind Maps and interview methods developed participants’ sonic awareness and

interest in the sonic environment. Where Sonic Eﬀects and the Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria

were applied by Hellström to analyse the sonic environment, these conceptual tools were described

288

as “pedagogic, descriptive and operative tools, training listening attention in daily situations, and

thereby enhancing the listener’s analytic capability.” Hellström states that introducing the Model in

289

an educational setting may assist students and practitioners to traverse the extensive concepts

operating in the Model, thereby overcoming challenges in complexity.

A Complementary Interdisciplinary Urban Sonic Design Tool

The Model may be applied in combination with subjective and objective interdisciplinary approaches

and methods as a complementary tool in qualitative and quantitative studies. Paquette and

Karapostoli & Votsi’s studies demonstrate that practitioners may beneﬁt from synthesising the

Model’s anthropological and phenomenological approach with other subjective musicological and

ecological approaches. The Model may be used in collaboration with soundscape methods and

concepts including sound counts, soundwalks, listening walks and paired with a sound diary, and

290

Truax’s Acoustic Communication Model concepts of sonic features, sound cycles and soundscape

291

balance. It may also be merged with Krause’s sound classiﬁcation system to study the

relationship between ecology and architecture. Further, Paquette suggests practitioners may

292

beneﬁt from combining the Model with Nicolas Tixier of CRESSON’s “qualifying listening in motion”

method for in-situ investigations.

Barrio & Carles and Vogiatzis & Rémy demonstrate the value of applying qualitative data collection

293

methods taken from the Model in conjunction with traditional quantitative noise abatement

approaches to improve noise regulation and urban planning practices. Paquette promotes this

294

approach, stating that it is necessary to apply the Model in conjunction with objective methods to

286

Hellström, Noise Design, 199.

287

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 124-125.

288

Hellström, Noise Design, 173.

289

Hellström, Noise Design, 24.

290

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment.”

291

Karapostoli, and Votsi, “Urban Soundscapes in the Historic Centre of Thessaloniki,” 169.

292

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 119.

293

Barrio, and Carles, “Acoustic Dimensions of Inhabited Areas,” 8.

294

Paquette, “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment,” 116.

7 5

best analyse the relationship between the objective “reality” and its subjective representation.

CO N CL USION

Amphoux states the Sonic Identity Model may be applied in practice in both large-scale city-wide

studies and smaller local studies, in part or in full, to describe urban sonic environments and/or

manage them. The ﬁve case studies examined in this chapter conﬁrm the Model’s applicability in

these contexts. The Model has been primarily used as a descriptive tool for analysis and in one

instance as an operative tool for developing recommendations for sonic environment management.

The Model cannot be picked up and mechanically applied; it is not a systematic manual for

practitioners to follow. The case studies investigated in this chapter evidence this: in each project

practitioners adapt, scale, augment and apply the Model in diﬀerent ways to suit project needs.

Rather than a “manual,” the Model may be better thought of as a guiding framework for practice

with a toolkit of ﬂexible and self-standing methods and conceptual tools which practitioners may

draw from, scale, adapt and expand upon to build a workﬂow suitable for the project at hand.

Sonic Mind Maps, Phono-reputable Inquiries & Re-activated Listening Interviews are valuable

methods for studying sounds and their subjective features; sound locations; diverse contexts in the

environment; out-of-context listener perception and memory; in-situ listener perception; and

interrelations between sound and context.

The Sonic Composition conceptual tool presents a little-used but valuable technique for guiding the

audio recording process in urban environments to capture recognisable — as opposed to realistic —

sonic representations of the environment. The CVS Model similarly has received little attention but

may prove useful in the initial stages of investigations into participant sonic knowledge and

experiences. In contrast, the EMP Model and the Sonic Eﬀects tool present two comprehensive and

useful repertoires of concepts useful for identifying and descriptively expressing relations between

listeners, sounds and the environment. Sonic Eﬀects are applicable both as a method for data

collection and as a conceptual tool for analysis.

Practitioner applications of the Sonic Identity Model demonstrate its usefulness in research, design

and education contexts, in both heavily regulated professional practice settings (see Vogiatzis &

Rémy’s study) and creative projects (see Hellström’s project). The Model’s methods and conceptual

tools are useful complementary tools for qualitative and quantitative studies. The Model may be

applied collaboration with oﬀensive, defensive and creative approaches from soundscape studies,

environmental noise management, urban soundscape design and sonic experience studies. This

includes aspects of Truax’s Acoustic Communication Model; soundscape studies methods of sound

counts, soundwalks and sound diaries; Krause’s soundscape ecology categorisation system; and

environmental noise management sound measurement and noise mapping techniques.

This chapter investigated how the Sonic Identity Model has been applied by practitioners and

examined its demonstrated usefulness and limitations. Taking this into consideration, the next

7 6

chapter investigates an approach to applying the Model in practice.

5 C H A P T E R

SITE INVESTIGATION PROJECT

In chapter 4 I examined practitioner uses of the Sonic Identity Model and evaluated its reported

usefulness. In this chapter I investigate the Model through research-led creative practice. I take

Amphoux’s invitation to scale, augment and implement the Sonic Identity Model for my project

needs to answer the ﬁnal research question:

How can the Sonic Identity Model be adapted and applied in the early stages of urban sonic design?

I present the work undertaken through reﬂexive action research to analyse, interpret and adapt the

Sonic Identity Model. I apply the Model in the early-stage design process and document, analyse

and describe singular urban sonic environments from my individual listening perspective.

I investigate two urban spaces: the indoor Couch Study Space and the outdoor University Lawn,

both at RMIT University. Three key stages of project work — Sonic Identity Model analysis, Model

interpretation and adaptation, and investigation of the project sites — allow me to develop the Sonic

Identity Practitioner Adaptation and study these environments.

This chapter includes a brief overview of the site investigation project, followed by a description of

the work undertaken to interpret and adapt the Model. I present the developed adaptation of the

Model, one of two project work outputs. I then describe how the adaptation was applied to

investigate the project sites in the early stage design process — through site documentation,

analysis and description — with insights into the use of the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation. I

conclude with the presentation of ﬁndings on the sonic environments of the Couch Study Space and

University Lawn sites, constituting the second output from project work. I conclude with insights

7 7

into use of the Sonic Identity Model in the early stages of urban sonic design.

PROJECT OVERVIEW

5.1 P ROJE CT OVERVIEW 5.1

The site investigation project involved three key stages of project work, summarised below.

Stage 1: Analysis of the Sonic Identity Model

Research, examine and understand Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model.

Stage 2: Interpretation and Adaptation of the

Model

Interpretation: Translate Amphoux’s complex and schematic theoretical directives, terminology, methods and concepts into practical steps.

Adaptation: Scale, re-organise and modify methods, concepts and directives from the Sonic Identity Model and introduce supplementary steps to support the reconﬁgured approach: the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation.

Stage 3: Investigation of the Project Sites

Use the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation in the early-stage design process to document, analyse and describe the sonic environments of two project sites from an individual practitioner’s subjective listening perspective.

Table 12: Key Stages of the Site Investigation Project

This table summarises each key stage of the site investigation project.

Over two years of project work I continually worked at each stage of project work. To investigate the

Model analysis

Amphoux interview

ANALYSIS OF   SONIC IDENTITY   MODEL English analysis French analysis Primary data

CRESSON visit

Adaptation versions V2 V1

INTERPRETATION   & ADAPTATION   OF THE MODEL

Site study 1 Site study 2

Site study 3

Collective analysis

INVESTIGATION   OF THE PROJECT   SITES

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4

2 0 1 8

2 0 1 9

2 0 2 0

R P A

Y A M

N U J

L U J

G U A

P E S

T C O

V O N

C E D

N A J

B E F

R A M

R P A

Y A M

N U J

L U J

G U A

P E S

T C O

V O N

C E D

N A J

B E F

R A M

R P A

Y A M

Figure 9: Timeline of the Site Investigation Project

This diagram details the project work activities undertaken over two years and illustrates how each stage of project work has informed one another.

7 8

project site I carried out three site studies and one collective analysis of the results.

Through iterative cycles of action research I developed my understanding of the Sonic Identity

Model and produced the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation (SIPA). Through use of the SIPA I

investigated the sonic environments of the Couch Study Space and the University Lawn. Each stage

cannot be considered separately; Model analysis and understanding developed through adaptation

and site investigations, and vice versa.

2: INTERPRETATION & ADAPTATION OF THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL

The Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation (SIPA)

1: ANALYSIS OF THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL

Phase 1: In-situ Site Documentation Phase 2: Systemisation & First Analysis of the Results Phase 3: Final Analysis of the Results Phase 4: Multimodal Representation of the Results

3: INVESTIGATION OF THE PROJECT SITES THROUGH USE OF THE SIPA

Sonic Environment Documentation Phase 1: In-situ Site Documentation

a) Site Information b) Sonic Mind Maps c) Sound Commentary d) Descriptive Categorisation of Sonic Composition

Sonic Environment Analysis Phase 2: Systemisation & First Analysis of the Results a) Collation & Organisation of Documentation Data b) Systematic Synthesis of Sound Commentary c) Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Mind Maps d) Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Composition e) Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Eﬀects

Phase 3: Final Analysis of the Results

a) Summary of Site Documentations b) Summary of Site Information c) Sonic Mind Map Analysis d) Sonic Eﬀects Analysis e) Sonic Composition Analysis f) Synthesis & Analysis of Sonic Environment Descriptions g) Sound Commentary: Remarkable Expressions h) Analysis of Qualitative Criteria

Description & Communication of the Findings Phase 4: Multimodal Representation of the Results

a) Sonic Sketches b) Sonic Composition Map c) Written Description of Findings

Figure 10: Workﬂow of the Site Investigation Project

This diagram displays the iterative and cyclical workﬂow of the site investigation project through use of the SIPA.

7 9

5.1.1 PRO JE CT S IT E 1: THE COU CH STUDY SPACE

The Couch Study Space is an indoor study space in RMIT University. The C shaped room, enclosed

by glass panel walls, consists of a large rectangular space partitioned by a timber wall to the east.

The north and south walls continue past this partition, creating two parallel walkways that extend

from the main open area. The centre of the space features a raised timber deck with low seating and

benches, which users may move and arrange for informal study. A row of aﬃxed desks run along

the north and south walls of the site. The space was recently designed as part of RMIT’s New

Academic Street project led by Lyons Architects and completed in 2017.

The site is positioned as a thoroughfare between adjacent buildings. Exits at each corner of the

room connect the site to nearby student spaces, amenities, meeting rooms, lifts and the library.

Along the site’s western wall doors open onto a protected outdoor balcony that overlooks Swanston

Street, a main public transport thoroughfare through Melbourne city. When the balcony doors open,

S W A N S T O N S T R E E T

0 1

d B

D L B

Figure 11: Layout of the Couch Study Space Project Site

This diagram displays the layout and ﬁxtures of the Couch Study Space. The room connects to two adjacent buildings, separated by glass walls.

8 0

sounds from the city rise and the room’s indoor-outdoor boundaries blur.

The room is accessible throughout the year. It is used primarily by university students, as a

thoroughfare and as a space for studying, sleeping, eating, relaxing, socialising and listening to

music. On weekdays during semester, from mid-morning to late afternoon, the space is lively and

Image 1: the Couch Study Space in Pictures

The tiled images above provide the reader with a snapshot of the space. The photos were collected over several site documentations.

8 1

busy. On weekends, the site is primarily used for study and has a focused atmosphere.

5.1.2 PRO JE CT S IT E 2: UNIV ER SITY LAWN

The University Lawn is an outdoor space in RMIT University. The rectangular site consists of an

artiﬁcial lawn and an open wooden deck lined with trees. Movable benches, tables and chairs are

dispersed across the site. To the north and east the site is bordered by a garden embankment with a

water feature, a small basketball court and the walls of the Old Melbourne Gaol museum, which rise

above the garden embankment. A terrace, accessible by stairs, connects the University Lawn to the

gaol above. To the south and west the site is surrounded by concrete pathways with bicycle rails,

campus buildings, a cafe and a service road. City high-rises form a distant secondary visual

perimeter. Alleys, stairs and semi-enclosed walkways connect the University Lawn to campus

spaces and public city spaces. These openings provide several pathways for users to navigate

R U S S E L L S T R E E T

M E L B O U R N E G A O L

C A

Figure 12: Layout of the University Lawn Project Site

This diagram displays the layout and ﬁxtures of University Lawn. The site is accessible by several pathways and surrounded by buildings.

8 2

through the space.

The University Lawn is generally utilised by university students and staﬀ, as well as maintenance

workers and members of the public. The space is used as a thoroughfare and for lunch breaks,

relaxation, study, socialising, reading, exercising and meetings. The University Lawn is busiest on

weekdays as a thoroughfare at the start and end of the workday and as a lunch space around

midday. On weekends the site is largely devoid of users. As the site is exposed to dynamic

environmental conditions, activity levels are highly dependent on weather.

295

The University Lawn was designed in 2012 by Peter Elliott Architecture and Design. The architects

296

describe the space as “a quiet haven within the bustling city.” The space was described by a

Image 2: the University Lawn in Pictures

The tiled images above provide a snapshot of the space. These photos were collected over several site documentations.

295

Peter Elliott Architecture and Urban Design, “RMIT University Lawn Precinct,” 21 February 2019,

https://peterelliott.com.au/projects/urban-design/rmit-university-lawn-precinct.

296

Peter Elliott Architecture and Urban Design, “RMIT University Lawn Precinct.”

8 3

design jury as “a moment of calm and delight within the city.”

5.2 I N TERPRETATION & ADA PTATION OF THE SONIC

ID EN T ITY MODEL

INTERPRETATION & ADAPTATION OF THE SONIC IDENTITY MODEL

To apply the Sonic Identity Model presented challenges; the Model was originally intended to be 5.2 used by a research team with dozens of participants to study a city. It was thus essential to reduce

Model analysis

ANALYSIS OF THE  SONIC IDENTITY   MODEL

Adaptation versions

INTERPRETATION   & ADAPTATION OF THE MODEL

● Phono-reputable Inquiry & Re-activated Listening Interview methods omitted

● Sonic Eﬀects tool adapted ● Sonic Composition tool adapted ● Sonic Mind Map method adapted

● “Systemisation” step developed

● Sonic Mind Map method adapted

● CVS Model tool omitted ● Audio modelling steps developed

● Re-structure: 3 “phases”

● Phase 4 introduced

Site study 1

Site study 2

Site study 3

Collective analysis

INVESTIGATION   OF THE PROJECT   SITES

2 0 1 8

2 0 1 9

G U A

P E S

T C O

V O N

C E D

N A J

B E F

R A M

R P A

Y A M

N U J

L U J

G U A

P E S

T C O

V O N

C E D

N A J

B E F

2 0 2 0 R A M

R P A

Y A M

Figure 13: Timeline of Model Interpretation & Adaptation

This diagram displays key developments over time. “Versions” were developed through continued model analysis and site investigations.

the Model’s scale, adapt selected methods and conceptual tools, and re-organise steps.

I developed the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation (SIPA) over two years of this research project.

The SIPA oﬀers an English-speaking practitioner’s interpretation, adaptation and extension of

Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model for use in the early-stage design process. SIPA was produced

through continued Model analysis and iterative documentation, analysis and description of the

project sites. Exploratory use of the SIPA in study two was therefore diﬀerent to study three. The

8 4

collective analysis of each site was carried out in 2020 once the SIPA was well-developed.

The SIPA is a standalone manual for documenting, analysing and describing subjective sonic

environment qualities and characteristics of singular urban spaces from an individual listener’s

perspective. The SIPA utilises four methods and conceptual tools from the Sonic Identity Model and

introduces written sound commentary as an additional method for data collection.

MET HODS

CONCEPTUAL TOOLS

CVS Model

EMP Model

Sonic Mind Maps

Sonic Eﬀects

Phono- reputable Inquiries

Re-activated Listening Interviews

Sonic Composition tool

✖ *

✖

Gleeson

✖ * Adapted and applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s directives in the Sonic Identity Model

Table 13: Use of Sonic Identity Model Methods & Concepts

This table displays Sonic Identity Model methods and conceptual tools included and adapted in the SIPA and applied in the site investigation project.

Sonic Identity Model

Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation

PHASE 1: In Situ Site Documentation — sonic experience The SIPA is structured through four “phases.” Each phase directs a practitioner through a series of of the practitioner

APPROACH 1: Sonic Memory — selection of representative examples

1.1

Sonic Mind Map

1 a)

Site Information

practical steps to document, analyse and describe the sonic environment. The complete SIPA is not

1.2

Phono-Reputable Enquiry

Sonic Mind Maps

CVS (Known, Lived, Sensed) Model

1.3

1 b) the following page summarises and compares the phases and steps of the SIPA to Amphoux’s 1 c)

Sound Commentary

included here due to size but will be presented in the Masters examination exhibition. The table on

Descriptive Categorisation of Sonic Composition

1 d)

Descriptive List of Sonic Eﬀects

1 e)

PHASE 2: Systemisation & First Analysis of the Results — synthesis of the practitioner’s sonic experiences

Collation & Organisation of Documentation Data

2 a)

APPROACH 2: Sonic Perception — constitution of an analytical framework 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4

Systematic Synthesis of Sound Commentary

2 b)

Recordist Form Location information Background Ambience Signal Composition Intention Information

Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Mind Maps

2 c)

2.2

Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Composition

2 d)

Site recording, Acoustic Measurements & Track Assembly

Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Eﬀects

2 e)

2.3

Re-activated Listening Interviews

PHASE 3: Final Analysis of the Results — sonic environment qualities and characteristics

APPROACH 3: Sonic Interpretation — characterisation of the sonic identity of a city

Summary of Site Documentations

3 a)

3.1

Summary of Site Information

3 b)

Sonic Mind Map Analysis

3 c)

Sonic Eﬀects Analysis

3 d)

3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4

Sonic Identity Chart: speciﬁcation of the sequences Factual description of sound levels Recognition of interview ease/difﬁculty Description of sonic fragments Systematic list of sonic effects

Sonic Composition Analysis

3 e)

3.2

3 f)

Synthesis & Analysis of Sonic Environment Descriptions Sound Commentary: Remarkable Expressions

3 g)

Analysis of Qualitative Criteria

3 h)

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4

Sonic Identity Chart: synthesis of hypotheses & comments Space Time Semantic and/or cultural aspects Sonic material

3.3

PHASE 4: Multimodal Representation of the Results — aural, visual & written description of the sonic environment 8 5 Electroacoustic Modelling of Sonic Sketches 4 a)

3.4

Composite Sonic Composition Map

4 b)

Written Narrative Description of Findings

4 c)

3.4.1

Sonic Identity Chart: semantic niche and remarkable expressions Sonic Identity Chart: objectiﬁcation of qualitative criteria Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria

Sonic Identity Model.

M ETH O DS

CO NC EPT UAL TOOLS

Phono-

Re-activated

Sonic

Sonic Mind

Sonic

reputable

Listening

CVS Model

Composition

EMP Model

Maps

Eﬀects

Inquiries

Interviews

tool

✖ *

✖

Gleeson

✖ * Adapted and applied diﬀerently to Amphoux’s directives in the Sonic Identity Model

Sonic Identity Model

Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation

APPROACH 1: Sonic Memory — selection of representative examples

PHASE 1: In-situ Site Documentation — sonic experience of the practitioner

1.1

Sonic Mind Map

Site Information

1 a)

1.2

Phono-Reputable Inquiry

Sonic Mind Maps

1 b)

1.3

CVS (Known, Lived, Sensed) Model

Sound Commentary

1 c)

Descriptive Categorisation of Sonic Composition

1 d)

Descriptive List of Sonic Eﬀects

1 e)

PHASE 2: Systemisation & First Analysis of the Results — synthesis of the practitioner’s sonic experiences

Collation & Organisation of Documentation Data

2 a)

APPROACH 2: Sonic Perception — constitution of an analytical framework 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4

Systematic Synthesis of Sound Commentary

2 b)

Recordist Form Location information Background Ambience Signal Composition Intention Information

Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Mind Maps

2 c)

2.2

Site recording, Acoustic Measurements & Track Assembly

Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Composition Systemisation & First Analysis of Sonic Eﬀects

2 d) 2 e)

2.3

Re-activated Listening Interviews

PHASE 3: Final Analysis of the Results — sonic environment qualities and characteristics

APPROACH 3: Sonic Interpretation — characterisation of the sonic identity of a city

Summary of Site Documentations

3 a)

3.1

Summary of Site Information

3 b)

Sonic Mind Map Analysis

3 c)

Sonic Composition Analysis

3 d)

3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4

Sonic Identity Chart: speciﬁcation of the sequences Factual description of sound levels Recognition of interview ease/difﬁculty Description of sonic fragments Systematic list of sonic effects

Sonic Eﬀects Analysis

3 e)

3.2

3 f)

Synthesis & Analysis of Sonic Environment Descriptions Sound Commentary: Remarkable Expressions

3 g)

Analysis of Qualitative Criteria

3 h)

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4

Sonic Identity Chart: synthesis of hypotheses & comments Space Time Semantic and/or cultural aspects Sonic material

3.3

PHASE 4: Multimodal Representation of the Results — aural, visual & written description of the sonic environment Electroacoustic Modelling of Sonic Sketches 4 a)

3.4

Composite Sonic Composition Map

4 b)

Written Narrative Description of Findings

4 c)

3.4.1

Sonic Identity Chart: semantic niche and remarkable expressions Sonic Identity Chart: objectiﬁcation of qualitative criteria Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria

Table 14: Sonic Identity Model Versus Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation

This table summarises and compares the SIPA to Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Model.

Phase One: In-Situ Site Documentation

Phase one involves the in-situ documentation of singular urban sonic environments by an individual

practitioner. It adapts Amphoux’s Sonic Mind Map technique and two conceptual tools from the

Sonic Identity Model — the Sonic Composition tool and the Sonic Eﬀects tool — for use as data

collection methods. A practitioner documents the sonic environment through free-form and time-

based in-situ sonic mind maps, written sound commentary, the Sonic Composition tool and the

8 6

Sonic Eﬀects tool. A practitioner also records site information and photographs the environment.

Phase Two: Systemisation & First Analysis of the Results

Phase two involves the collation, organisation, systemisation and ﬁrst analysis of the results from

phase one. Where multiple site documentations have been carried out, this step assists in the

collective organisation of documentation results. This phase takes cues from Amphoux’s directives

for data synthesis and management described throughout the Sonic Identity Model. Additional steps

for Sonic Mind Map analysis are introduced to examine the results from the adapted methods.

Phase Three: Final Analysis of the Results

Phase three involves the in-depth analysis of phase two results. This phase incorporates sections of

Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Chart and introduces additional analysis steps to explore the insights that

may be gained from each adapted method for data collection. A practitioner analyses and describes

results in terms of space, time, semantic and/or cultural criteria, and sonic material, and selects

remarkable expressions from sound commentary. Following Amphoux’s directives, a practitioner

uses the EMP Model and its Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria to identify and describe Environmental,

Milieu and Landscape Criteria in each site.

Phase Four: Multimodal Representation of the Results

As per the Sonic Identity Model, the SIPA does not guide a practitioner to a singular outcome or

ﬁnding. It remains open-ended and a practitioner concludes by distinguishing and describing sonic

qualities and characteristics of the environment under investigation. Phase four is introduced into

the SIPA to summarise phase three ﬁndings through one multimodal description of the sonic

environment.

A practitioner produces “sonic sketches” to assist in the aural communication of ﬁndings from

phase three. This step takes cues from the Sonic Identity Model, where Amphoux directs

researchers to develop recordist forms detailing key Sonic Composition sounds and their qualities to

guide the production of “sonic fragments” for use in interviews. Similarly, recordist forms are

employed in phase four to guide the production of “sonic sketches.”

Two additional steps are introduced in phase four: the production of a “Sonic Composition map”

and the written narrative description of ﬁndings. These steps serve to communicate ﬁndings on the

8 7

sonic environment.

5.2.1 A DA PTAT IO N OF SO NIC M I ND M AP METHOD

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of method

Adaptation 1:   free-form in-situ sonic mind map

Adaptation 2:   time-based in-situ sonic mind map

20-50 diverse participants.

Individual practitioner.

Participants draw Sonic Mind Maps of the city with comments.

Practitioner draws a sound map of the environment on A4 piece of paper.

Practitioner draws a sound map of every sound perceived in the environment over a period of 20 minutes. As each sound perceived is mapped, note the time that each sonic event is heard by referring to a 20 minute timer. Where sounds continue for an extended period of time, note the perceived duration of the sound.

Not applicable.

Practitioner annotates the sound map with descriptive comments about the sounds.

Researcher guides participants to include short comments and specify areas that are rich in acoustic qualities.

(Maps developed out of context)

(Maps developed in situ)

Table 15: Adaptation of Sonic Mind Map Method

This table compares Amphoux’s directives for using the data collection method to its adaptations in the SIPA.

I adapted Amphoux’s Sonic Mind Map method for data collection into two separate techniques for

in situ data collection: “free-form in-situ sonic mind maps” and “time-based in-situ sonic mind

maps.” The free-form mapping technique bears similarities to Paquette’s use of the method (see

297

chapter 4.2.1). The time-based technique incorporated here is not original; it was developed from a

technique previously used by practitioners in research and teaching at RMIT University. While it is

unclear how this time-based method developed, it bears strong similarities to Amphoux’s method in

297

Lawrence Harvey, and Jules Moloney, “Resounding Cities: Acoustic Ecology and Games Technologies,” in Building Sustainable Communities: Environmental Justice and Global Citizenship, eds. J. D. Wulfhorst, and Anne K. Haugestad (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2006), 181-196.

8 8

both name and approach.

5.2.2 A DA PTAT IO N OF SO NIC CO MPOSITION TOOL

Adaptation of tool as method for data collection

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of conceptual tool

Practitioner listens in situ.

Researcher analyses Sonic Mind Maps, Phono- reputable Inquiry results and Re-activated Listening Interview results.

Researcher categorises sounds described by participants into Background, Ambience and Signal sound orders.

Practitioner categorises the sounds heard in the sonic environment into the three orders of Background, Ambience and Signal.

Practitioner distinguishes the dominating Sonic Composition order in situ and describes each order.

Researcher includes this information in the recordist form to assist the audio recordist in discretely capturing the Background, Ambience and Signal orders in manageable parts.

(Analysis conducted out of context)

(Data collected in situ)

Table 16: Adaptation of Sonic Composition Tool

This table compares Amphoux’s directives for using the conceptual tool to its adaptation in the SIPA.

I adapted the Sonic Composition tool for use as a method for data collection in phase one.

5.2.4 A DA PTAT IO N OF SO NIC EF FECTS TOOL

Adaptation of tool as method for data collection

Sonic Identity Model: directives for use of conceptual tool

Practitioner listens in situ.

Researcher analyses Phono-reputable Inquiry results and Re-activated Listening Interview results.

Researcher extrapolates and systematically lists the Sonic Eﬀects described by participants in the Sonic Identity Chart.

Practitioner listens and lists the Sonic Eﬀects perceived in the environment. Practitioner describes the sounds and/or environment conditions that generate each Eﬀect.

(Analysis conducted out of context)

(Data collected in situ)

Table 17: Adaptation of Sonic Effect Conceptual Tool

This table compares Amphoux’s directives for using the conceptual tool to its adaptation in the SIPA.

8 9

I adapted the Sonic Eﬀect tool for use as a method for data collection in phase one.

5.3 I N VESTIG ATION OF THE PROJECT SITES

Through use of the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation (SIPA) I investigated the sonic

environments of the Couch Study Space and the University Lawn. This section details the site

investigation work I undertook to document each environment though site studies one to three and

analyse and describe each sonic environment through the collective analysis of results.

Site-based project work was discontinued from March 2020 due to the COVID-19 university campus

shutdown. Consequently I was unable to complete sonic sketches of each environment as planned.

Site study 1

Site study 2

Site study 3

Collective analysis

Phase 1: In Situ Site   Documentation

Phase 2: Systemisation   & First Analysis of   the Results Phase 3: Final Analysis   of the Results

Phase 4: Multi-modal   Representation of the   Results

2 0 1 8

2 0 1 9

G U A

P E S

T C O

V O N

C E D

N A J

B E F

R A M

R P A

Y A M

N U J

L U J

G U A

P E S

T C O

V O N

C E D

N A J

B E F

2 0 2 0 R A M

R P A

Y A M

Figure 14: Investigation of the Project Sites Over Time

This timeline displays the work undertaken to investigate the project sites through phases one to four of the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation.

Partial audio recording work is detailed in 5.3.3.

I produced structured compendium documents through each iterative use of phases one to four of

the SIPA, culminating in a total of 30 site investigation documents. Please see Appendix 4 for a

9 0

summarised inventory of documents generated and data collected throughout site investigations.

5.3.1 S ONIC E NV IRO NMENT DOCUM ENTATION

Over three site studies between September 2018 and August 2019 I carried out phase one of the

SIPA a total of 17 times, culminating in 17 site documentations across the two project sites. See

Study:

Wed. 10/10 2018

Thurs. 10/01 2019

Fri. 11/01 2019

Sat. 12/01 2019

Sun. 13/01 2019

Mon. 14/01 2019

Tues. 15/01 2019

Wed. 16/01 2019

Tues. 30/07 2019

Fri. 02/08 2019

Sun. 04/08 2019

Mon. 05/08 2019

Tues. 06/08 2019

Wed. 07/08 2019

7am

8am

9am

10am

11am

12pm

1pm

2pm

3pm

4pm

5pm

6pm

7pm

8pm

Appendix 4 for a summary of data collected.

Couch Study Space University Lawn

Table 18: Timeline of Documentation of Project Sites

This table displays when each project site was documented. It shows the range of documentation times and durations, varying from 1-3 hours, between 7am to 8pm.

Site documentations followed SIPA phase one steps. Each documentation involved describing

relevant site information (environmental conditions, timing information and activity levels); producing

one free-form and one time-based in-situ sonic mind map; freely describing the sonic environment

through written sound commentary; descriptively categorising sounds perceived into the Sonic

9 1

Composition orders of Background, Ambience and Signal; and descriptively listing Sonic Eﬀects

perceived. Through multiple site documentations I generated a large amount of data — through 17

site documentations I produced 17 site documents comprising 27 sound maps and 219 sound

commentary notes and documented 64 diﬀerent Sonic Eﬀects and 101 diﬀerent sounds.

Through repeated site documentations I developed my relationship with the environments and a

deeper attunement to sound qualities, behaviours, the complex interrelations between sounds,

environment features and my listening location, and how these relations changed over time.

The narrative below describes how a typical one hour site documentation following phase one of the

SIPA may unfold. This account draws upon my experiences from site documentations and provides

a generalised description of the process.

I arrive at the site and choose a ﬁxed location to document from. I try to vary my location and

orientation each time. I begin by listening; I spend approximately ﬁve minutes tuning in to the

environment, the site conditions and the activities occurring around me.

I begin data collection by noting relevant information down — the weather, user activities,

events unfolding, my listening location — and I describe the overall sonic environment and my

listening attention levels. This may take ﬁve to 10 minutes. I then develop a free-form in-situ

sonic mind map, drawing sounds around me and their qualities. This takes approximately 15

minutes. Next, I use a stopwatch and develop a time-based in-situ sonic mind map over 20

minutes.

Next I categorise the sounds I perceive into the Sonic Composition orders of Background,

Ambience and Signal. I describe each order and distinguish the balance of the orders, from

strongest to weakest. I then listen for and descriptively list the Sonic Eﬀects I experience.

These two activities take approximately 15 minutes to complete.

Throughout the documentation I take written sound commentary notes on the sonic

environment around me.

I complete site documentation by photographing the site and returning to my site information

notes to record any key changes that have occurred.

As appropriate timeframes for site documentation were unknown I explored options for the

documentation process, carrying out phase one at diﬀerent times of the day, on diﬀerent days of the

week and varying the documentation duration and my listening position. Short documentation

timeframes of one hour were useful for understanding sound rhythms and cycles of activity in the

sonic environment on a micro-level. However the brief window of time limited the amount of data

collected and as a result some steps were at times cursory. In contrast, longer documentations of

9 2

three hours were useful in recognising rhythms and cycles of sounds which unfolded over large

periods of time. The extended documentation window allowed for detailed, descriptive data

collection that would prove to be especially insightful during site analysis. Documenting the

environments from diﬀerent ﬁxed vantage points allowed me to experience diﬀerent listening

perspectives. The ﬁxed listening position was necessary for the data collection methods. However, it

limited my ability to explore sonic environment qualities through motion.

Adapted Method for Data Collection: Free-form and Time-based In-Situ Sonic Mind Maps

To produce the sound maps I mapped all perceived sounds in the environment onto paper. Through

each adapted sonic mapping method I captured my in-situ perception of sounds and their locations

with reference to my ﬁxed listening position. I represented perceived sounds through lines and

symbols using an iconography I developed in situ. Lines and arrows express sound movement;

circles around sounds indicate their inexact locations; changes to line thickness express increases

and decreases in loudness; diﬀerences in icon size signify relative sound amplitudes; and timing

Image 3: Example Time-based In-situ Sonic Mind Map, University Lawn

The image above displays one time-based in-situ sonic mind map developed in the University Lawn over a 20 minute period on 4 August 2019. I, the listener, am positioned on the lawn facing south. The water feature is on my left, the basketball court behind. See Appendix 5 for a magniﬁed image.

9 3

information in time-based maps indicates when a sound is perceived and how long for.

Developing time-based in-situ sonic mind maps was often a frenzied exercise of listening, drawing

and time-stamping as many sounds I could manage in the time given. The method demanded I

make choices, conscious or not, of which sounds to pay attention to, which sounds to draw, and

Image 4: Example Free-form In-situ Sonic Mind Map, Couch Study Space

The image above displays one free-form in-situ sonic mind map developed in the Couch Study Space on 6 August 2019. I, the listener, am positioned on the north edge of the raised wooden deck, facing towards Swanston Street. Footsteps pass close by on the concrete walkway to my right. See Appendix 5 for a magniﬁed image.

which sounds to leave out.

In contrast, developing free-form in-situ sonic mind maps was an exercise in selective listening and

detailed description through drawing sounds and writing corresponding sound commentary notes. I

made more conscious and considered decisions about which sounds to draw and how to express

their qualities. Free-form maps contained fewer sounds than their time-based counterpart, however

the sounds depicted were done so with greater detailed description and expression regarding sound

qualities and behaviour. The process of repeated mapping the project sites from diﬀerent ﬁxed

vantage points over multiple documentations further developed my spatial awareness of each sonic

9 4

environment.

Adapted Method for Data Collection: Sonic Composition

The Sonic Composition tool was a useful method for documenting clear and organised sonic

“snapshots” of the sonic environments of each site within brief windows of time. This method

developed my critical listening and reﬂection skills as it required I listen for, evaluate and categorise

sounds as they emerged with consideration for sound rhythm, movement, duration, and

discontinuity, and involved active reﬂection of my reception towards the sounds — did I search out

this sound or did it ﬁnd me? Was this sound always here, going unnoticed?

Adapted Method for Data Collection: Sonic Eﬀects

The identiﬁcation and description of Sonic Eﬀects was a useful method for documenting multiple

sound experiences in-situ. The tool allowed for the quick and comprehensive documentation of both

complex physical sound behaviour and my subjective perceptions of sounds in the environment.

The number of Sonic Eﬀects listed and described in each site documentation varied from ﬁve to 17.

298

Sonic Eﬀects enabled me to attune to what is described by CRESSON as my “internal

soundscape” and provided a language through which I could identify, name and describe

previously inscrutable sonic experiences with rigour and a system of logic. Through continued

documentation of Sonic Eﬀects I attuned past the physical properties of sounds to its context, its

perception, its symbolic meaning, and its connections to memory. The experience of a sound

evoking a memory could be deﬁned as the “Phonomnesis” Sonic Eﬀect and the act of searching for

298

Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 9.

9 5

a sound that could not be heard could be labelled as the “Deburau” Sonic Eﬀect.

5.4.2 S ONIC ENVIRONMENT AN ALYSIS

I carried out the collective analysis of the documentation results following phases two and three of

the SIPA. Through phase two I collated, organised and systemised the results from multiple in-situ

site documentations and conducted a ﬁrst analysis. I organised sound commentary results by

redundancy, analysed time-based and free-form in-situ sonic mind maps to reveal new insights and

analysed sound commentary and sonic maps to extrapolate further Sonic Composition and Sonic

Eﬀects data.

I then carried out the ﬁnal analysis of each project site following phase three to distinguish sonic

environment qualities and characteristics. I conducted further exploratory analysis into the sound

maps, Sonic Composition and Sonic Eﬀects results and collectively analysed phase two and three

results through Amphoux’s Sonic Identity Chart. Through use of the chart I described each sonic

environment in terms of space, time, sonic material and semantic and/or cultural criteria; selected

remarkable expressions from sound commentary; and used the EMP Model to identify and

descriptively summarise Qualitative Criteria.

Analysis: Free-form and Time-based In-Situ Sonic Mind Maps

I conducted exploratory analysis of the free-form and time-based in-situ sonic mind map results to

understand the sounds expressed, their qualities and behaviour, and my listening experiences in the

environments. From each map I extrapolated and listed sounds and their frequency of occurrence

over multiple documentations, and analysed sound localisation, movement, loudness, repetition,

distance and height information. I examined and summarised the relationship between my variable

listening location and orientation in the environments against my perception of key sounds and their

qualities. To analyse my listener perception and attention levels in the environments over time I

translated two time-based in-situ sonic mind maps from each environment into timelines.

Analysis revealed the complexity of each sonic environment, and temporal, spatial and localisation

information. These insights were overlooked through other methods for data collection. Time-based

maps captured a diverse range of sounds in each site, highlighting the complexity of each sonic

environment and revealing consistent sounds fundamental to each. Time markers revealed temporal

and spatial information and perceived sound rhythms, cycles and durations. Each sound mapping

technique was useful for expressing sonic depth and sound localisation information (relative to a

listener’s position) and revealing the blurred sonic boundaries of each site. The maps were limited in

their documentation of sonic height information; sounds from above and below were collapsed into

9 6

two-dimensional drawings.

Timelines produced from time-based in-situ sonic mind maps revealed insights into my listening

perception over time, demonstrating where my listening attention shifted, rose and fell, focused and

lapsed. It also revealed Synecdoche and Asyndeton Sonic Eﬀects, documenting where I selectively

focused on sounds and necessarily “forgot” others, or where I “deleted” repetitive or continuous

Image 5: Example Time-based In-situ Sonic Mind Map Timeline, University Lawn

This image displays one example of one time-based in-situ sonic mind map translated into a timeline. This example translates the time-based map displayed in image 3 above. See Appendix 5 for a magniﬁed image.

sounds from my perception.

Analysis: Sonic Composition

I analysed the Sonic Composition of each environment to understand the sounds that constitute

each order, the perceived dominance of each order throughout the day, and factors inﬂuencing this

dominance.

Through analysis of sound commentary and sonic maps I distinguished additional Background,

Ambience and Signals sounds present in each environment and combined analysis results with

phase one Sonic Composition results. I then systemised Background, Ambience and Signal sounds

by dominance and established the dominating sounds that constitute each order. Through

9 7

comparative analysis I examined the documented balance of Sonic Composition orders across site

documentations to recorded site information (timing, weather, activity levels) and sound commentary

notes. Through doing so I understood how the perceived balance of Sonic Composition in each

environment shifts over time, the events, activities and daily cycles and rhythms that inﬂuence the

ﬂuctuating dominance of each Sonic Composition order, and the corresponding listening modes

that site users may experience throughout the day.

Analysis: Sonic Eﬀects

In addition to my use of the Sonic Eﬀects as a method for data collection, I used Sonic Eﬀects as a

conceptual tool, as Amphoux intended, to extrapolate Eﬀects from documentation results. Through

analysis of sound commentary and sonic maps I distinguished several Sonic Eﬀects not captured

during in-situ site documentation, demonstrating the value of Sonic Eﬀects as a method for data

299

300

301

collection and a tool for analysis. Several perceptual Eﬀects were expressed clearly through written

sound commentary, including Deburau, Intrusion and Phonotonie.

Following analysis I charted the Sonic Eﬀects results, ordered Eﬀects results by dominance, and

summarised the experience of each Sonic Eﬀect and the sounds and conditions that gave rise to it.

Phases two and three provided two opportunities to continuously analyse documentation results

from phase one via diﬀerent approaches and conceptual tools, serving to progressively synthesise

results and reveal insights into the sonic environments under investigation.

Phase two was an important step for managing the large amount of data generated in phase one

and revealed the value of documenting the sonic environments through multiple methods. Site

information (weather, activity levels, site photos) in conjunction with written sound commentary,

visual maps, categorised Sonic Composition sounds and listed Sonic Eﬀects together provided a

rich multimodal snapshot of the sonic environments as I experienced them. This proved to be

valuable when re-approaching documentation data captured up to 17 months prior; through the

diﬀerent media captured I was able to reconnect to each documentation and “hear“ each in-situ

listening experience.

The use of the Sonic Identity Chart in phase three was useful for revealing sonic environment

qualities and characteristics. The EMP Model in phase three was particularly useful for

distinguishing Criteria that were not previously recognised. Sonic Eﬀects proved to be an important

299

Deburau Sonic Eﬀect: the listener’s attention searches for a sound that is inaudible. Once

discovered, it is no longer of particular interest. Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 37.

300

Intrusion Sonic Eﬀect: the inopportune presence of a sound inside a protected territory that creates

a feeling of violation of that space. Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 65.

301

Phonotonie Sonic Eﬀect: a sound provokes a feeling of euphoria for the listener. Augoyard, and

Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 86.

9 8

resource that led to the identiﬁcation of many Criteria as several Eﬀects closely relate to or reveal

302

303

304

Criteria (for instance, the Reverberation Sonic Eﬀect may give rise to Reverberant Space or

Volume Criteria). The relationships between Sonic Eﬀects and Qualitative Criteria revealed the

recurrent structure and relations between the concepts that operate within the Sonic Identity Model.

Similarly, the Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria provided a language to identify and articulate

previously nameless sonic environment qualities. It was diﬃcult to identify the expressive Milieu and

Landscape Criteria, which was due in part to a lack of expressive comments and descriptions in the

data available, and to the schematic and symbolic deﬁnitions of the Criteria.

5.4.3 D ES CRIPT IO N OF THE FI NDI NGS

To reach high-level ﬁndings on the sonic environment of each project site I followed phase four of

the SIPA to produce a multimodal description of each sonic environment through the production of

sonic sketches, a composite sonic composition map and a written narrative description of ﬁndings

on the University Lawn and the Couch Study Space.

I planned to produce “sonic sketches” of each environment to assist in the aural communication of

ﬁndings. I developed “recordist forms” to systemise all key Background, Ambience and Signal

sounds and their locations, qualities, related Sonic Eﬀects and Qualitative Criteria, and timing

information. As the Sonic Identity Model does not oﬀer directives for audio recording I developed my

own approach. Working from the recordist forms I planned to record each Sonic Composition order

separately, capturing key sounds and their qualities over multiple site visits. I then planned to layer

recordings and compose a series of one to two minute multichannel sonic sketches of each sonic

environment from one ﬁxed listening perspective. I began the multichannel audio recording of

Background sounds in each environment over ﬁve site visits between November 2019 and March

2020. Due to the COVID-19 university campus shutdown from March 2020 I ceased audio recording

and was unable to complete the sonic sketches. Pending access to the campus and site activity

levels (i.e. presence of key sound sources in recordist forms) the sonic sketches will be developed

further and presented at the examination exhibition.

To visually represent sonic environment ﬁndings I analysed sonic maps and Sonic Composition

results from phase three and developed composite Sonic Composition maps, graphically

representing the Sonic Composition of each environment with location and distance information.

To reach high-level ﬁndings on each sonic environment I reviewed phase three results, extrapolated

302

Reverberation Sonic Eﬀect: a sound continues after the cessation of its emission as reﬂections of

the sound on surfaces in the surrounding space are added to the direct signal. Augoyard, and Torgue, eds., Sonic Experience, 111.

Reverberant Space Qualitative Criteria: sounds reﬂect the physical shape of a space. Hellström,

303 Noise Design, 235.

304

Volume Qualitative Criteria: relating to scale, a place is qualitatively or quantitatively perceived to

have an unlimited volume. Hellström, Noise Design, 233.

9 9

key ﬁndings and descriptively summarised ﬁndings through a high-level written narrative

description. I used terminology from the Sonic Identity Model to describe the sonic environments of

each project site in terms of sonic structure, composition, spatial qualities, narrativity, social

qualities and rhythmic qualities.

Through phase three I produced over 10,000 descriptive words on each site’s sound qualities and

characteristics, in addition to several tables, lists and maps. Phase four was a necessary step to

bring together and summarise phase three ﬁndings through one multimodal representation.

While sonic sketches could not be completed, the partial work undertaken to record each

environment revealed the value of recordist forms. Recordist forms were a useful tool for informing

my audio recording approaches. Just as Paquette determined in his study of Commercial Drive,

Vancouver, the recordist forms guided the audio recording process towards capturing more

recognisable — rather than realistic — audio recordings. Through use of the recordist forms I re-

conﬁgured my signal-focused audio recording sensibilities developed from audio engineering

training and focused on capturing my subjective experience of sounds in the environment.

The written narrative description of each sonic environment was surprisingly quick to produce.

Sustained use of the Sonic Identity Model developed my understanding of the sonic environment

past its physical qualities and towards its temporal, spatial, perceptual and expressive qualities.

Consequently, ﬁndings on these sound qualities were easily recognisable. The Sonic Eﬀects and

Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria provide a comprehensive language through which I could rigorously

1 0 0

express these qualities and talk about sound.

5.4 P ROJ EC T SITES: FINDINGS

High-level ﬁndings on the sonic environments of each project site, produced through phase four of

the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation (SIPA), are presented below. These high-level ﬁndings

were reached through sustained site investigation work carried out over two years as described in

5.3. The results provide a window back into the extensive documents of results produced from

phases one to three of the SIPA. Findings on each project site’s sonic environment are presented

through a Sonic Composition map and a written narrative description, interwoven with terminology

from the Sonic Identity Model. Summarised deﬁnitions of concepts and terms are included in

footnotes. 305

306

Droumeva states that there is no one “soundscape” of any given place, but a multitude of individual

aural experiences. The descriptive narratives presented below of each project site, developed

over several periods of time spent listening in the environments, express my collective individual

aural experiences of the Couch Study Space and the University Lawn.

In reading the descriptive ﬁndings, it is easy to see the results as ﬁxed or rigid, producing an illusion

that the sonic space of each environment is constant and known. However, these ﬁndings are not

deﬁnitive or conclusive in any way; like the weather, sonic phenomena is always in a state of

change. The ﬁndings below oﬀer insight into my subjective listener experience of each environment

within a limited window of time.

5.4.1 T HE S ONIC ENVIRO NM ENT OF THE COUCH STUDY SPACE

307

Sonic Structure

The sonic environment of the Couch Study Space is Metabolic, dynamic and constantly in

308

309

motion, remaining stable across weekdays and diminishing slightly on weekends. Its stable sonic

310

311

structure has Compositional Clarity through its Sonic Infrastructure of undulating sonic

305

All Qualitative Criteria deﬁnitions in 5.4 are summarised from Hellström, Noise Design, 233-239;

Sonic Eﬀect deﬁnitions in 5.4 are summarised from Augoyard, and Torgue, Sonic Experience.

306

Droumeva, “Soundmapping as Critical Cartography,” 338.

307

Sonic Metabolism Qualitative Criteria: a dynamic meta-stable structure of unstable emerging

sounds or exchanges between ﬁgure & background sounds.

308

Compositional Clarity Qualitative Criteria: a Metabolic sonic structure characterised by a certain

permanence of emission which assures the stability of the sonic climate.

309

Sonic Infrastructure Qualitative Criteria: characterised by emerging sonic events that support the

sonic continuum or the sonic background.

310

Sonic Ambience Sonic Composition order: the order of sound that gives a place its distinctive

character. Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 67-68.

311

Sonic Signal Sonic Composition order: the order of sound that we do not have to listen for; they

grab your attention unexpectedly. Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 68.

1 0 1

Ambience and Signal sounds. These sounds continuously emerge, rise and fall over time in a

312

Complexity of diﬀerent rhythms, timbres and amplitudes to form a dynamic ensemble of sounds

that are at once individual and collective.

Image 6: Composite Sonic Composition Map, Couch Study Space

Visual representation of the key Background, Ambience and Signal sounds that compose the Couch Study Space’s sonic environment. See Appendix 5 for a magniﬁed image.

Sonic Composition

Soft, muted and feathery sonic Ambience sounds dominate the Sonic Composition of the Couch

Study Space. This order of sound is composed of Metabolic conversations, voices and whispers

within the room; conversations, voices and indistinct sounds from adjacent spaces; study sounds

from the site’s ﬁxed desks; soft footsteps; the rustling and unzipping of backpacks; chairs moving;

lift arrival bells; doors banging; clothes and cushions moving and compressing; tram bells and

312

Complexity Qualitative Criteria: a tangle on a hierarchical sonic level.

1 0 2

brakes; distant sirens; and indistinct car horns from the surrounding city. Some Ambience sounds at

ﬁrst appear as Signals before moving to become Ambience sounds as I establish their rhythms over

313

time (lift bells, doors banging shut). Ambience sounds give the space its distinctive character. Many

Ambience sounds Mask one another, adding to my diﬃculty of identifying individual sounds in the

314

Metabolic environment. Consequently, I often ﬁnd myself searching for sounds that cannot be

315

316

heard, generating the Deburau Eﬀect. This often-dominating Sonic Composition order may

engender the “Attending ” mode of “ﬂoating listening” in site users.

During busy periods of activity, the sonic Ambience may be overwhelmed by sonic Signals, which

overall constitute the environment’s second-most dominant order of sound. Unexpected,

discontinuous and sometimes harsh sonic Signals grab my attention, including the sounds of chairs

screeching; close and/or loud conversations; close and/or sharp footsteps; tram sounds when the

balcony doors are open; loud/close sirens; objects sliding and moving across the raised timber

317

deck; and lift bells and door bangs when infrequent. Many Signals focus my attention, generating

318

the Hyperlocalisation Eﬀect. When this order dominates site listeners may shift into the

corresponding “Listening” mode and ﬁnd themselves constantly focusing on unexpected sonic

319

320

events unfolding around them, potentially interfering with their ability to focus and study.

I perceive very few sonic Background sounds in the environment. The continuous Drones of the

air-conditioner in the ceiling and of the city are intermittently audible, rising in strength when the

313

Mask Sonic Eﬀect: The presence of a sound that partially or completely masks another sound

because of its intensity or the distribution of its frequencies.

314

Deburau Sonic Eﬀect: the listener’s attention searches for a sound that is inaudible. Once

discovered, it is no longer of particular interest.

315

Schaeﬀer’s “Attending” mode of listening: selective listening and understanding of sounds and

their qualities and meanings. Schaeﬀer, Treatise on Musical Objects, 78-79, 83

316

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 37 (my translation).

317

Hyperlocalisation Sonic Eﬀect: a sound source which irresistibly focalises the listener’s attention on

the location of emission. When the source moves, the listener follows it.

318

Schaeﬀer’s “Listening” mode of listening: focusing on the sound character and the relationship

between the sound event and the sound source. Hellström, Noise Design, 72, 74-76.

319

Sonic Background Sonic Composition order: the order of sound we do not pay attention to.

Hellström, Noise Design, 77.

320

Drone Sonic Eﬀect: the presence of a constant layer of stable pitch with no noticeable variation in

intensity.

1 0 3

doors opening onto the outdoor balcony are propped open.

Spatial Qualities

321

The Couch Study Space is enclosed by glass walls that separate the room from other university

spaces and the city. The glass walls Filter sounds entering the room, which are soft and muted.

The sonic environment encompasses immediate sounds occurring from within the room,

intermediate sounds from adjacent indoor spaces, and outdoor campus spaces that run underneath

the building; and distant sounds from the city. These diﬀerent sonic depths and distances generate

Sonic Relief. 322

323

324

The sounds of doors banging, student activity and distant city sounds of trams provide a clear

sense of Orientation. These sounds serve as Sonic Anchors, locating me within the university

campus and more broadly along Swanston Street in Melbourne. Sounds propagate through the

several open doorways leading to the Couch Study Space, providing clear sonic Openings. 325

326

Through these Openings, voices, activity and city sounds are falsely localised through the doorways,

327

generating the Delocalisation Eﬀect.

328

The ﬂuctuating presence of immediate, intermediate and distant sounds skew the site’s Scale and

Volume. The room’s Scale can shift from a medium-sized enclosed indoor space to a large semi-

enclosed space with blurred physical boundaries and indoor/outdoor parameters. This generates a

sense of unlimited Volume in the room’s perceived width but not height; sound-absorbent materials

329

in the ceiling maintain an accurate sense of Scale and Volume from above.

The site’s glass walls have a subtle and short Reverberation Eﬀect upon sounds within the room,

330

reﬂecting voices and reducing the clarity of individual sounds. Filtration and Reverberation make it

331

diﬃcult to localise sounds and perceive movement, generating the Ubiquity Eﬀect as many

321

Filtration Sonic Eﬀect: the reinforcing or weakening of speciﬁc frequencies of a sound, perceived

when the frequency of a sound we are accustomed to is modiﬁed.

322

Sonic Relief Qualitative Criteria: the alternating relation (rhythmic or arrhythmic) between nearby

and distant sounds, between sonic perspectives or between sonic depths.

323

Orientation Qualitative Criteria: a clear and objectiﬁed perception of the sonic orientation of space.

324

Sonic Anchoring Qualitative Criteria: sound(s) that anchors habitants to a place and memory.

325

Opening Qualitative Criteria: the clear perception of an opening of a space.

326

Delocalisation Sonic Eﬀect: the listener recognises an error in localising a sound; the listener does

not know where the sound source comes from, but knows exactly where it seems to come from, and is conscious this is an illusion.

327

Scale Qualitative Criteria: the clear perception of a given spatial scale that arises by listening.

328

Volume Qualitative Criteria: relating to scale, a place is qualitatively or quantitatively perceived to

have an unlimited volume.

329

Reverberation Sonic Eﬀect: a sound continues after the cessation of its emission as reﬂections of

the sound on surfaces in the surrounding space are added to the direct signal.

330

Ubiquity Sonic Eﬀect: Spatio-temporal conditions express the diﬃculty or impossibility of locating

a sound source.

331

Augoyard and Torgue, Sonic Experience, 130.

1 0 4

sounds appear to come “simultaneously from a singular source and from many sources.”

Movement can be perceived in close or high-frequency sounds, such as in the sounds of close

footsteps passing by or plastic crackling. These sounds irresistibly focus my attention and generate

the Hyperlocalisation Eﬀect.

Narrative & Social Qualities

332

333

The sonic environment is largely representative of an indoor study environment, lending a degree of

Naturality to the space. Sounds unfold with a clear sense of Narrativity that is easy to

334

understand. Occasionally, out-of-place sounds emerge, such as the sound of a siren Delocalised

335

into the room, or a trapped bird calling indoors. These Decontextualised sounds, along with close

336

sonic Signals, often Attract and polarise my listening attention.

Distant sounds of the city and general sounds of activity within the room signify the Publicity of

the environment. Within this public environment, I periodically experience a sense of Privatisation. 337

“The site feels sheltered and private, separate to everything else going on outside of the room. I can

338

easily immerse myself in the small metabolic sounds of activity happening around me and forget

about the other environments (until a loud or strange sound enters my perception).” Users openly

339

sleep in the space, suggesting the sense of Privatisation is felt by many. My sense of Privatisation is

intermittently Intruded upon by inopportune and often loud conversations that violate the stable

sonic environment the room collectively works to maintain.

340

The multiplicity of sounds in the space, their Metabolic structure and the Masking Eﬀect generates a

strong sense of Anonymity. This Anonymity lends itself to both the space’s public character and

341

its sense of intimacy. “The room has an eﬀect where many sources cannot be heard individually, and

332

Naturality Qualitative Criteria: the expected feeling when a sequence unfolds naturally. The sounds

themselves are like the sounds from nature, or seem to be “normal.”

333

Narrativity Qualitative Criteria: a sonic sequence’s structure may be regarded as narrative in the

sense that it expresses a linear temporal organisation.

334

Decontextualisation Sonic Eﬀect: out-of-place sound(s) in a coherent or predictable environment.

335

Attraction Sonic Eﬀect: an emerging sound phenomenon attracts and polarises attention, be it

conscious or not.

336

Publicity Qualitative Criteria: the recognition, appreciation or perception of the public character of

the urban space.

337

Privatisation Qualitative Criteria: an idealised qualiﬁcation of an urban sonic milieu by referring —

implicitly or explicitly — to characteristics of the private sphere.

338

Site documentation 5: Tuesday 6 August 2019.

339

Intrusion Sonic Eﬀect: the inopportune presence of a sound inside a protected territory that creates

a feeling of violation of that space.

340

Anonymity Qualitative Criteria: the public character of a space/situation is recognised by its anonymity, through multiplicity of emissions and the movability of sources prohibiting the listener from associating a sound to one person or incident.

341

Site documentation 1: Wednesday 10 October 2018.

1 0 5

so conversations are private.”

Rhythms & Cycles

342

The sonic environment is constructed of many sound rhythms, repetitions and cycles that unfold on

a micro-level, in small windows of time, and on a macro-level across several hours. Repetition is a

343

common Eﬀect perceived in the site. Repetitive lift bells, printer beeps, footsteps and tram bells

sound. Over time, Repetitive sounds generate the Asyndeton Eﬀect. Consequently, I tune out to

and momentarily or entirely “forget” the repetitive sounds. Through sustained listening I perceive

Repetition in sirens, car horns and miscellaneous bangs over longer cycles. Over several site

documentations, I perceive the repetitive nature of sounds such as footsteps, voices, lift bells, study

sounds and distant trams that always appear regardless of the day, time, month or season. These

sounds constitute fundamental components of the sonic environment. They each unfold according

to their own rhythms and cycles, periodically rising and falling in loudness and frequency of

344

occurrence while supporting the environment’s Metabolic structure. These sonic repetitions, cycles

and rhythms of activity can generate Rhythmicity, producing a sense of suspended time that is

often then interrupted by unexpected and attention-grabbing sonic Signals.

5.4.2 T HE S ONIC E NV IRO NM E NT OF THE UNIVE RSI TY LAWN

Sonic Structure

The sonic environment of the University Lawn varies in structure, sounds and sonic experiences

over time. Environmental conditions, site activity levels and distant city activity greatly inﬂuence my

345

346

subjective perception of this outdoor urban environment.

The overall sonic environment has a Metabolic and Schizophonic structure. Sounds

continuously emerge and disappear from close and afar, placing me within two radically diﬀerent

347

348

acoustic spaces: that of the immediate site, and that of the distant city. Within this Schizophony

there is Compositional Clarity: stable sounds of the water feature and the Drone of buildings

nearby are always present. During heightened periods of activity — on weekdays at the start and

342

Repetition Sonic Eﬀect: the reappearance of similar sound occurrences, perceived as identical.

343

Asyndeton Sonic Eﬀect: a fundamental eﬀect experienced when interpreting sound in the

environment. Sounds are “forgotten” or unheard, removed from the listener’s perception or memory.

344

Rhythmicity Qualitative Criteria: the objectiﬁed feeling of a suspension of time produced by rhythm

or regular alternation.

345

Sonic Metabolism Qualitative Criteria: a dynamic meta-stable structure of unstable emerging

sounds or exchanges between ﬁgure & background sounds.

346

Schizophonic Metabolic structure Qualitative Criteria: when the listener is situated in between two

acoustic spaces with radically diﬀerent sonic climates.

347

Compositional Clarity Qualitative Criteria: a Metabolic sonic structure characterised by a certain

permanence of emission which assures the stability of the sonic climate.

348

Drone Sonic Eﬀect: the presence of a constant layer of stable pitch with no noticeable variation in

intensity.

1 0 6

end of the work day and at lunch time — mechanical, natural and activity sounds entwine and

349

produce a sound structure of Complexity. In periods of reduced activity — on weekends and in

350

the evening — the University Lawn is often devoid of users and, consequently, many complex sound

events. The Metabolic structure becomes Informal and I perceive the sonic environment as

monotonous, dull and lifeless.

Image 7: Composite Sonic Composition Map, University Lawn

Visual representation of the key Background, Ambience and Signal sounds that compose the University Lawn’s sonic environment. See Appendix 5 for a magniﬁed image.

349

Complexity Qualitative Criteria: a tangle on a hierarchical sonic level.

350

Informal Metabolic structure Qualitative Criteria: characterised by a total absence of sonic

reference points, the sound space is perceived as monotonous.

1 0 7

Sonic Composition

351

352

The University Lawn’s dominating order of sonic Ambience sounds is characterised by

Repetitive and/or moving sounds, including the sounds of planes above; a distant melodic alarm;

353

sirens, motorbikes, tram bells, car horns and reversing vehicle alarm sounds; voices “ﬂoating” in and

out, Immersing me; the water feature; birds calling; wind blowing through trees; and rhythmic

354

sounds from the basketball court (ball bouncing, shoes shuﬄing, conversations). Wind, water and

355

birdcalls bring a strong Naturalism to the environment. The broad-band water feature and wind in

356

particular dominate the University Lawn’s sonic environment, Masking many other sounds,

357

358

Masking one another, and periodically Enveloping me. The sound of wind rising and falling in a

Wave Eﬀect as it blows through trees serves as a seasonal Time Donor, indicating warmer

months of the year (this sound is not present in winter as the trees are deciduous). The perceived

359

dominance of sonic Ambience is dependent on my listening location and orientation, particularly in

360

361

362

relation to the Masking water feature, rather than activity levels. Ambience sounds have “ﬂoating,”

363

364

“bubbling” and “undulating” qualities and the order is described as “pleasant” and

“delightful” to listen to. Ambience sounds may engender in site users the “Attending” mode of

351

Sonic Ambience Sonic Composition order: the order of sound that gives a place its distinctive

character. Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 67-68.

352

Repetition Sonic Eﬀect: the reappearance of similar sound occurrences, perceived as identical.

353

Immersion Qualitative Criteria: the listener has the impression of being completely plunged into the

sound material and their hearing is spellbound.

354

Naturalism Qualitative Criteria: the relative weight of “natural sounds” in a sonic sequence.

355

Mask Sonic Eﬀect: The presence of a sound that partially or completely masks another sound

because of its intensity or the distribution of its frequencies.

356

Envelopment Sonic Eﬀect: the feeling of being surrounded by a body of sound that predominates

over other circumstantial features of the moment.

357

Wave Sonic Eﬀect: sound(s) cycles that follow a curve of intensity analogous to the shape of a

wave: crescendo, maximal point, fast or progressive rupture of the sound, and decrescendo.

358

Time Donor Qualitative Criteria: sound(s) that indicate the time through its periodicity.

359

Site documentations 1, 2 and 8: Thursday 10 January, Friday 11 January, Friday 2 August, 2019.

360

Site documentation 1: Thursday 10 January 2019.

361

Site documentation 2: Friday 11 January 2019.

362

Site documentation 6: Tuesday 15 January 2019.

363

Site documentations 1 and 6: Thursday 10 January and Tuesday 15 January 2019.

364

Schaeﬀer’s “Attending” mode of listening: selective listening and understanding of sounds and

their qualities and meanings. Schaeﬀer, Treatise on Musical Objects, 78-79, 83.

365

Amphoux, L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes, 37 (my translation).

1 0 8

“ﬂoating listening.” 365

366

When site activity levels rise and unfold close by, sonic Signals rise in perceived dominance and,

overall, constitute the second-most dominant order of sound in the environment. My listening

proximity to the service road increases the audibility of Signals. This order of sound is composed of

loud, close or high-frequency sounds that are attention grabbing and discontinuous, and includes

the sounds of voices and conversations; footsteps; reverberant voices near the cafe; yells in

adjacent spaces and walkways; sounds from the basketball court (sneakers squeaking, yells, ball

367

shooting through the net); the use of nearby doors and gates; close birdcalls; car horns and

motorbikes; and Hyperlocalised planes above. Signal sounds gradually rise across weekday

368

mornings, serving as a Time Donors.

The weak order of Background sounds is composed of multiple Drones of traﬃc, nearby

369

buildings, and the water features’s engine room; distant planes; sirens; tram brakes; and

370

construction sounds. The various Drones produce a sense of Indiﬀerentiation, with traﬃc sounds

in particular described as a “washy and unclear… bath of sound.” Background sounds can

generally always be heard in the site regardless of my listening location, only diminishing in audibility

when my proximity to the water feature Masks Background sounds. The order rises in perceived

371

dominance on weekdays at peak hour when traﬃc levels increase, serving as a Time Donor. When

372

Background sounds rise, the sonic environment expresses a sense of De-humanisation and I

373

respond negatively to its Machinisation. The sonic environment becomes “lazy, indistinct, at

374

rest” and “low and empty, abandoned,” ﬁlled with the sounds of “hums left running, [and] cars

375

distantly zooming.” These sounds express the emptiness and lifelessness of the site and

366

Sonic Signal Sonic Composition order: the order of sound that we do not have to listen for; they

grab your attention unexpectedly. Hellström, “The Sonic Identity of European Cities,” 68.

367

Hyperlocalisation Sonic Eﬀect: a sound source which irresistibly focalises the listener’s attention on

the location of emission. When the source moves, the listener follows it.

368

Sonic Background Sonic Composition order: the order of sound we do not pay attention to.

Hellström, Noise Design, 77.

369

Indiﬀerentiation Qualitative Criteria: the distinctness of the sonic material is considered insuﬃcient

and the sonic environment is banal.

370

Site documentation 2: Friday 11 January 2019.

371

De-humanisation Qualitative Criteria: value judgement that rests on the opposition between the

human and the inhuman.

372

Machinisation Qualitative Criteria: the metaphor of the machine or the mechanisation of the world.

Sonic meaning is reduced to functional signals.

373

Site documentation 4: Sunday 13 January 2019.

374

Site documentation 6: Tuesday 15 January 2019.

375

Incarnation Qualitative Criteria: the listener internalises spatial, temporal or sonic qualities and

features that incarnate personal sentiments.

1 0 9

Incarnate a sentiment of monotony and lifelessness in the environment and more broadly the city.

376

Spatial Qualities

The University Lawn produces a sense of unlimited Volume as sounds emerge from diﬀerent sonic

377

depths and heights. Sounds are perceived to emerge from four sonic depths, generating Sonic

Relief: the immediate area (deck, lawn), the site periphery (service road, terrace, cafe, basketball

court), intermediate adjoining spaces, and the distant city. Sonic height varies too, expanding and

contracting as sounds of birdcalls and wind through the trees, distant high-rise construction, planes,

378

and plane reﬂections on high-rise facades allow me to “sense the diﬀerent heights and levels of the

379

site.”

Continuous sounds from intermediate and distant depths Filter through the environment,

380

reﬂecting and diﬀracting on buildings and appearing to come from everywhere and nowhere at

once. This generates the Ubiquity Eﬀect as I strive to locate the unlocatable sounds. “The

external city sounds washing and out with little chance for localisation. So many diﬀerent traﬃc

drones, building hums and engines blend and I cannot tell which is which, or if I can really hear

them.” 381

382

383

The conﬁgurations of buildings, alleys and walkways adjoining to the University Lawn generate

384

pronounced Reverberations and Echos. Ambience and Signal birdcalls, yells and basketball

385

sounds reﬂect oﬀ building facades and resound through site Openings. Intermediate and distant

376

Volume Qualitative Criteria: relating to scale, a place is qualitatively or quantitatively perceived to

have an unlimited volume.

377

Sonic Relief Qualitative Criteria: the alternating relation (rhythmic or arrhythmic) between nearby

and distant sounds, between sonic perspectives or between sonic depths.

378

Site documentation 2: Friday 11 January 2019.

379

Filtration Sonic Eﬀect: the reinforcing or weakening of speciﬁc frequencies of a sound, perceived

when the frequency of a sound we are accustomed to is modiﬁed.

380

Ubiquity Sonic Eﬀect: Spatio-temporal conditions express the diﬃculty or impossibility of locating

a sound source.

381

Site documentation 2: Friday 11 January 2019.

382

Reverberation Sonic Eﬀect: a sound continues after the cessation of its emission as reﬂections of

the sound on surfaces in the surrounding space are added to the direct signal.

383

Echo Sonic Eﬀect: the simple or multiple repetition of a sound emission, linked to a reﬂection in the

space.

384

Opening Qualitative Criteria: the clear perception of an opening of a space.

385

Delocalisation Sonic Eﬀect: the listener recognises an error in localising a sound; the listener does

not know where the sound source comes from, but knows exactly where it seems to come from, and is conscious this is an illusion.

1 1 0

Ambience sounds of tram bells and car horns Delocalise through these Openings, distorting the

386

387

388

389

site’s perceived Scale and Orientation. This generates the Decontextualisation Eﬀect, and

the unexpected and out-of-context nature of the sonic events Attracts my listening attention.

Immediate Signal sounds are Hyperlocalised and movement is clear, however at greater depths

sounds have little if any perceived movement. The site’s perceived size is largely dependent on my

proximity to the water feature, which diminishes any sense of Volume.

390

391

Narrative & Social Qualities

The site has a strong sense of Anonymity and is at once public and private. Publicity is

392

expressed in the sounds of traﬃc, user activity and Delocalised trams. The public sounds serve as

Sonic Anchors, connecting me to the city. A local inhabitant may even recognise the city as

Melbourne. Near the service road these public sounds rise in audibility: “When closer to the alley,

sounds of activity become so much more clear, and I become an active participant in the site. Social

sounds are more pronounced, as are my own sounds, and I feel connected again to the activity

394

around me.” 393

In contrast, my listening proximity to the water feature generates Privatisation. “Near the water

feature, the sounds of activity and other site sounds… are masked and lost. The site becomes

intimate, personal, other people do not matter. I cannot even hear my own sounds that well (my own

footsteps, my own clothing).” 395

Mask and Filtration Eﬀects often render sounds of activity, conversations and footsteps inaudible

and users can spend time in the environment without leaving a sonic imprint. This prevents listeners

396

from connecting sounds to their sources and oﬀers Anonymity. I frequently search for these muted

386

Scale Qualitative Criteria: the clear perception of a given spatial scale that arises by listening.

387

Orientation Qualitative Criteria: a clear and objectiﬁed perception of the sonic orientation of space.

388

Decontextualisation Sonic Eﬀect: out-of-place sound(s) in a coherent or predictable environment.

Attraction Sonic Eﬀect: an emerging sound phenomenon attracts and polarises attention, be it

389 conscious or not.

390

391

Publicity Qualitative Criteria: the recognition, appreciation or perception of the public character of

the urban space.

392

Sonic Anchoring Qualitative Criteria: sound(s) that anchors habitants to a place and memory.

393

Site documentation 8: Friday 2 August 2019.

394

Privatisation Qualitative Criteria: an idealised qualiﬁcation of an urban sonic milieu by referring —

implicitly or explicitly — to characteristics of the private sphere.

395

Site documentation 8: Friday 2 August 2019.

396

Deburau Sonic Eﬀect: the listener’s attention searches for a sound that is inaudible. Once

discovered, it is no longer of particular interest.

1 1 1

sound events and experience the Deburau Eﬀect.

CO N CL USION

In chapter 2 we reviewed established urban sonic design approaches available to designers. In

chapter 3 we examined one approach — the Sonic Identity Model — in detail, and in chapter 4

reviewed its adaptation and use in the study of neighbourhoods and cities by individuals and

research teams, with participants and without. Through chapter 5 we now see the Model’s

adaptation and application to study singular urban indoor and outdoor environments by an

individual practitioner in the early stages of urban sonic design.

This chapter proposes the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation as an early-stage design approach

for documenting, analysing and describing singular urban sonic environments from an individual’s

listening perspective. The Sonic Identity Model was adapted, scaled, re-organised, extended and

realised as the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation through a multistep process of analysis,

interpretation and adaptation, and practice-based activity. I drew from the Model’s “kit of parts” and

adapted the Sonic Mind Map method and applied the Sonic Composition and Sonic Eﬀects tools as

data collection methods. Through site analysis I found the Model’s Sonic Composition tool, Sonic

Eﬀects and EMP Model however require little to no adaptation. These tools are applicable for a

research team studying a city and an individual practitioner studying a singular urban space.

The Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation translates theory into practice and demonstrates the

Sonic Identity Model’s use as a tool for detailed sonic environment analysis in indoor and outdoor

spaces. Through use of the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation I listened to and documented the

sonic environments of the Couch Study Space and the University Lawn. Each adapted method for

data collection captured diﬀerent sound qualities and perceptions of the project sites. Together

these techniques produced extensive material for further analysis that spanned daily cycles of

events and activities; sound propagation behaviour; sound distance, localisation and movement

information; sound rhythms and cycles; spatial and temporal dimensions; subjective listener

perception; and the physical, symbolic, contextual and perceptual Sonic Eﬀects of sounds.

The Sonic Identity Model’s conceptual tools were useful for analysing the material collected through

listening. Sonic Eﬀects and the Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria were especially useful for revealing

sound qualities and evaluating, measuring and quantifying my perception of — and reception

towards — the sonic environment. These tools provided a language with which to rigorously talk

about sound and describe sonic environments while always keeping the listener in the picture.

Together, the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation's methods for data collection and the Sonic

Identity Model’s conceptual tools unfold sound qualities and characteristics of complex urban sonic

environments as they are experienced and perceived.

This chapter presented my adaptation and use of the Sonic Identity Model in the early stages of

urban sonic design. The following chapter summarises conclusions from the Masters research

1 1 2

project and speculates on future research directions.

6 C H A P T E R

CO NCLUSIONS & FUTURE RES E ARCH DIRECTIONS

6.1 C ONCLUS IONS

This Masters serves as a space for practice transformation and mastery of skills and techniques in

urban sonic design. It is the pursuit of a deeper understanding of, and relationship with, sound in

everyday environments. Across the research project I conducted a domain review; studied the Sonic

Identity Model; interpreted and adapted the Model for use in the early-stage design process; and

used the adaptation to investigate the sonic environments of the indoor Couch Study Space and the

outdoor University Lawn in RMIT University. I produced three project outputs: a detailed explanation

of the Sonic Identity Model, the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation, and high-level ﬁndings on the

sonic environments of the two project sites. Through these research and practice-based activities I

articulated mastery in three areas: mastery of domain, mastery of a principal methodology in the

ﬁeld, and mastery of methodology application.

Mastery of Domain

Through domain research into sound studies in chapter 2 I deﬁned and described the area of

practice I am moving into: urban sonic design. I identiﬁed four key urban sonic design ﬁelds the

research project sits across and relates to: environmental noise management, soundscape studies,

urban soundscape design and sonic experience studies.

These ﬁelds oﬀer several complementary oﬀensive, defensive and creative approaches and

subjective and objective methods for studying, managing and designing urban sonic environments.

Designers must embrace and draw upon these approaches and methods to understand and design

1 1 3

the complex urban sonic environment from a multi-dimensional and interdisciplinary perspective.

This area of practice is not without its challenges (see chapter 2.3). Practitioners operating within

sound studies must deﬁne their own disciplinary boundaries, engage in broader forms of knowing

and situate non-western thinking as a fundamental component of sound studies. Complex

qualitative urban sonic design theories are diﬃcult to put into practice. There are challenges in

communication between theoreticians, practitioners and everyday persons, and between sound-

focused disciplines. There is a lack of well documented projects and applied examples of qualitative

urban sonic design. As a practitioner operating in this interdisciplinary area, I must work to address

these challenges; this Masters serves as a ﬁrst step for doing so.

Mastery of a Principal Methodology in the Field

Through continued research, analysis and practice-based project work I comprehensively mastered

and explained the Sonic Identity Model in chapter 3 and its use by practitioners in chapter 4. The

Sonic Identity Model is a complex and schematic guiding framework for urban sonic design practice

with a toolkit of ﬂexible and self-standing methods and conceptual tools. The Model distinguishes

and describes sonic environment characteristics and qualities from a listener-centric and always

contextualised perspective. Practitioners may draw from, scale, adapt and augment the Model for

project needs. Practitioners may use the Model to understand urban sonic environments as they are

listened to, remembered, perceived, evaluated, experienced and represented.

The Model sits apart to other established approaches from soundscape studies, urban soundscape

design and environmental noise management. Each of these ﬁelds deal with select dimensions of

the sonic environment — sound loudness, noise and listener discomfort (environmental noise

management — see chapter 2.2.1); social, cultural and ecological aspects (soundscape studies —

see chapter 2.2.2); and sound context and listener perception, comfort and preferences (urban

soundscape design — see chapter 2.2.3). In contrast, the Sonic Identity Model attempts to deal with

all dimensions of the “Sonic World.”

Practitioners can apply the Model in collaboration with established qualitative and quantitative

approaches from urban sonic design ﬁelds (see chapter 4.4.2) for comprehensive urban sonic

environment analysis, management and/or design. The Model can be used by individuals and teams

in research, design and education settings to study indoor and outdoor urban spaces,

neighbourhoods and cities.

The Model proposes methods for data collection and a family of conceptual tools that reveal

subjective sound features; location and context information; listener perceptions and memories, the

interrelations between sound and the environment (see chapter 4.4.1) and perceived sound

characteristics and qualities (see chapter 5.4). Sonic Eﬀects and Qualitative Criteria are especially

useful tools that provide a language for designers to identify, name and describe sound qualities as

1 1 4

they are listened to, experienced and perceived (see chapter 5.4.2).

The Sonic Identity Model may serve as a vehicle for traversing current urban sonic design

challenges of putting theory into practice and improving interdisciplinary communication. Its “guide-

like” structure and technical, methodological and theoretical explanations make it possible for

practitioners to implement the theory in practice. Its extensive vocabulary of Sonic Eﬀects and

Qualitative Criteria may provide a language for cross-disciplinary communication about subjective

sound qualities and listener perceptions. However, its schematic nature and complexity make its use

a challenge in itself.

Mastery of Methodology Application

In chapter 1 I proposed one approach to the pre-design process — the “early-stage design

process” — to document, analyse and describe urban sonic environments prior to managing,

designing or changing them. Through the site investigation project in chapter 5 I conceptualised,

developed and proposed an early-stage design approach, adapting the Sonic Identity Model to the

Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation. The Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation oﬀers one

approach to listening for design.

Through use of the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation I mastered methods for attuning into and

documenting my listening awareness and perception of urban environments. I mastered conceptual

tools for detailed analysis of temporal, physical, spatial and perceptual sound qualities and

characteristics. I used these tools to describe and communicate the sonic environments of the

Couch Study Space and the University Lawn.

My study into and use of the Sonic Identity Model enacted a higher order of thinking about the sonic

environment. I expanded my critical listening skills and developed a new way of thinking and talking

about sound. I now understand sound in urban environments as a lived, expressed, remembered

and contextualised experience. It is best understood through multiple urban sonic design

approaches. The Sonic Identity Model equipped me with the tools and vocabulary to work in an

1 1 5

interdisciplinary capacity across urban sonic design ﬁelds.

6.2 F U TURE RESEARCH DIRE CTIONS

This research project demonstrates a path forward for urban sonic design and reveals a number of

potential future research directions.

Understanding the Sonic Identity Model and its use in Design

The research project may assist practitioners in sound and environment focused disciplines to

engage with the Sonic Identity Model. The Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation oﬀers a ﬁrst step

towards a framework for pre- and post-project documentation and evaluation, and for detailed

qualitative sonic environment analysis. However, there are clear limitations to the Sonic Identity

Practitioner Adaptation, discussed below.

Site ﬁndings from the site investigation project (see chapter 5.4) point to another potential use of the

Sonic Identity Model: for developing qualitative listener-focused design briefs for urban sonic design

in indoor and outdoor urban spaces. I intend to investigate this potential pathway in future practice.

Further practitioner applications of the Sonic Identity Model on an operative level — for sonic

environment management and design — is needed. I intend to collaborate with practitioners in

urban design ﬁelds and environmental noise management to investigate the Model’s use in

professional practice settings.

Expanded Applications

The Sonic Identity Model explores listening experience and memory. The Model may therefore serve

as a useful tool for historical soundscape documentations and cultural studies. Given the Model’s

focus on subjective listener perceptions it may also be a valuable tool for studying user-experience-

focused environments such as museums and galleries.

The Model has potential use as a pedagogical tool. The Model has been informing my teaching in

soundscape and design courses at RMIT University. Over two years I have translated concepts into

teaching materials and used methods for data collection from the Sonic Identity Practitioner

Adaptation with close to 100 students from diverse disciplinary backgrounds. The Model’s use in

teaching was not discussed in the dissertation due to scope, but will be investigated in future

research and forthcoming publications.

Importantly, the project demonstrates the Model’s use for studying indoor environments, which are

seldom discussed in urban sonic design. It demonstrates the applicability of a framework intended

for outdoor urban environment analysis in one enclosed space, however further use of the Model in

1 1 6

a range of indoor settings is needed.

Further Work on the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation

More work is required to test and develop the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation for expanded

use outside of this research project. Introducing methods for documenting the sonic environment in

motion may enable practitioners to apprehend sound qualities and listener perceptions experienced

through movement. Expanded use of the Adaptation by other listeners is needed to test and reﬁne

steps. Further work is needed to test the Adaptation’s use for environment audio recording and

electroacoustic modelling, as this project work was stopped due to COVID-19 restrictions.

Continued study of the Sonic Identity Model with French-speaking researchers from (or connected

to) CRESSON is needed to develop a deeper understanding of the Model’s principle of recurrence,

intersubjective approach and its conceptual tools (particularly the EMP Model, see chapter 3.6.4).

Through further development, the Sonic Identity Practitioner Adaptation may oﬀer one urban sonic

design approach for deep study of everyday urban sonic experience.

The ﬂexibility and compatibility of the Sonic Identity Model and the Sonic Identity Practitioner

Adaptation suggest Amphoux’s methodology may be a useful framework for soundscape analysis in

combination with non-western sound practice. Further investigation into the Model’s applicability in

1 1 7

diverse environments and cultural settings is needed.

R E F E R E N C E S

AAU Laboratory. “About the AAU Laboratory,” AAU: Ambiances Architectures Urbanités. Accessed

19 June, 2019. https://aau.archi.fr/laboratoire-aau/.

AAU Laboratory. “CRESSON Research Team,” AAU: Ambiances Architectures Urbanités. Accessed

19 June, 2019. https://aau.archi.fr/crenau/.

Amphoux, Pascal. “Deﬁning a Sound Ecology of Urban Space.” In Sound Worlds from the Body to

the City: LISTEN!, translated and edited by Ariane Wilson, 129-146. Newcastle upon Tyne:

Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019.

Amphoux, Pascal. “Environment, Milieu, Landscape (Re)deﬁnitions.” Translated by Sophie Provost.

Conference presentation at the CRESSON Winter School, Grenoble, France, 28 January, 2019.

https://ehas.hypotheses.org/3551.

Amphoux, Pascal. Interview by Björn Hellström. 6 September, 2000. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

hal-01564775.

Amphoux, Pascal. Interview by Sophie Gleeson. 14 October, 2019.

Amphoux, Pascal. L’ identité Sonore des Villes Européennes. CRESSON, IREC Institut de Recherche

sur l’Environnement Construit, 1993.

Amphoux, Pascal, Christophe Jaccoud, Hanna Meier, Hans Peter Meier-Dallach, Marco Gehring,

Jean-Luc Bardyn, and Grégoire Chelkoﬀ. Aux Écoutes de la Ville: la qualité sonore des espaces

publics européens, méthode d’analyse comparative. Enquête sur trois villes suisses. CRESSON,

IREC (Institut de Recherche sur l’Environnement Construit), 1991. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

hal-01373745.

Atienza, Ricardo. “L’identité Sonore : une variable essentielle dans la conﬁguration urbaine : étude

pour l'incorporation critique du concept d'identité sonore dans l'élaboration du projet urbain,

comme condition à priori d'un lieu.” PhD thesis, l’Université Pierre Mendès France, y la Universidad

1 1 8

Politécnica de Madrid, 2008.

Attia, Mariam, and Julian Edge. “Be(com)ing a Reﬂexive Researcher: a Developmental Approach to

Research Methodology.” Open Review of Educational Research 4, no. 1 (2017): 33-45. https://

doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1300068.

Augoyard, Jean-François. “An Interdisciplinary Notion: the Sonic Eﬀect.” Translated by Sophie

Provost. Conference presentation at the CRESSON Winter School, Grenoble, France, 28 January,

2019. https://ehas.hypotheses.org/3554.

Augoyard, Jean-François. “Contribution à une théorie générale de l’expérience sonore : le concept

d’eﬀet sonore.” Revue de Musicothérapie 9, no. 3 (1989): 18-36. Cited in Thibaud, Jean-Paul.

“Listening to Urban Sounds.” Urbanistica, Istituto nazionale di urbanistica, no. 153 (2014): 122-126.

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01560163.

Augoyard, Jean-François. “The Cricket Eﬀect: Which Tools for Research on Sonic Urban

Ambiances?” In From Awareness to Action: Proceedings from “Stockholm, Hey Listen!” Conference

on Acoustic Ecology, Stockholm, June 9-13, 1998, edited by Henrik Karlsson, 116-125. Stockholm:

The Royal Swedish Academic of Music, 1999.

Augoyard, Jean-François, and Henri Torgue, eds. Sonic Experience: a Guide to Everyday Sounds.

Translated by Andra McCartney and David Paquette. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press,

2005.

Australian Government. The Health Eﬀects of Environmental Noise. Commonwealth of Australia,

2018.

Balaÿ, Olivier. “Discrete Mapping of Urban Soundscapes.” Translated by Harry Forster. Soundscape

4, no. 1 (Spring/Summer 2004): 13-14.

Bandt, Ros. “The Australian Sound Design Project,” University of Melbourne. Accessed 18

November, 2019. http://www.sounddesign.unimelb.edu.au/site/index2.html.

Barclay, Leah. “Acoustic Ecology and Ecological Sound Art: Listening to Changing Ecosystems.” In

Sound, Media, Ecology, edited by Milena Droumeva and Randolph Jordan, 153-177. Cham:

Palgrave MacMillan, 2019.

Battesti, Vincent, and Nicolas Puig. “‘The Sound of Society:’ a Method for Investigating Sound

Perception in Cairo.” The Senses and Society 11, no. 3 (2016): 298-319. https://doi.org/

1 1 9

10.1080/17458927.2016.1195112.

Botteldooren, Dick, Tjeerd Andringa, Itziar Aspuru, A. Lex Brown, Daniele Dubois, Catherine

Guastavino, Catherine Lavandier, Mats Nilsson, and Anna Preis. “Soundscape for European Cities

and Landscape: Understanding and Exchanging.” In Soundscape of European Cities and

Landscapes, edited by J. Kang, K. Chourmouziadou, K. Sakantamis, B. Wang and Y. Hao, 36-43.

Oxford: Soundscape-COST, 2013.

Brown, A. Lex. “Advancing the Concepts of Soundscapes and Soundscape Planning.” In

Proceedings of ACOUSTICS 2011, Gold Coast, Australia, 2011.

Brown, A. Lex. “Soundscape Planning as a Complement to Environmental Noise Management.” In

Proceedings of 43rd International Congress on Noise Control Engineering. Melbourne: The

Australian Acoustical Society, 2014.

Brown, A. Lex, and Andreas Muhar. “An Approach to the Acoustic Design of Outdoor Space.”

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 47, no. 6 (2004): 827-842. https://doi.org/

10.1080/0964056042000284857.

Brown, A. Lex, Jian Kang, and Truls Gjestland. “Towards Standardization in Soundscape Preference

Assessment.” Applied Acoustics 72 (2011): 387-392.

Bull, Michael, ed. The Routledge Companion to Sound Studies. London: Routledge, 2018.

Bull, Michael, and Les Back, eds. The Auditory Culture Reader. New York: Berg, 2003.

Carpenter, Edmund, and Marshall McLuhan. “Acoustic Space.” In Exploration in Communication, an

Anthology, edited by Edmund Carpenter and Marshall McLuhan, 65-70. London: Beacon Press,

1960.

Carr, Wilfred, and Stephen Kemmis. Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research.

London: RoutledgeFarmer, 1986.

Cerwén, Gunnar. “Urban Soundscapes: a Quasi-experiment in Landscape Architecture.” Landscape

Research 41, no. 5 (2016): 481-494. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2015.1117062.

Chattopadhyay, Budhaditya. “Canonization and the Color of Sound Studies.” Sounding Out!, 6

August, 2018. https://soundstudiesblog.com/2018/08/06/canonization-and-the-color-of-sound-

studies/.

Cobussen, Marcel, Vincent Meelberg, and Barry Truax, eds. The Routledge Companion to Sounding

1 2 0

Art. New York: Routledge, 2017.

De Coensel, Bert, and Dick Botteldooren. “The Quiet Rural Soundscape and How to Characterize

it.” Acta Acoustica united with Acustica 92, no. 6 (2006): 887-897.

Downton, Peter. Design Research. Melbourne: RMIT University Press, 2004.

Droumeva, Milena. “Soundmapping as Critical Cartography: Engaging Publics in Listening to the

Environment.” Communication and the Public 2, no. 4 (2017): 335–351. https://doi.org/

10.1177/2057047317719469.

Dubois, Danièle, Catherine Guastavino, and Manon Raimbault. “A Cognitive Approach to Urban

Soundscapes: Using Verbal Data to Access Everyday Life Auditory Categories.” Acta Acustica

united with Acustica 92, no. 6 (2006): 865-874.

Guiu, Claire. “Listening to the City: the Sonorities of Urban Growth in Barcelona.” In Toward an

Anthropology of Ambient Sound, edited by Christine Guillebaud, 168-185. London: Routledge,

2017.

Hällgren, Nina. “Designing with Urban Sound: Exploring Methods for Qualitative Sound Analysis of

the Built Environment.” Licentiate thesis, Konstfack University College of Arts, Crafts and Design,

2019.

Hällgren, Nina. “Urban Sound Design: Can We Talk About It?” Sound Eﬀects 2, no. 2 (2012): 36-50.

https://doi.org/10.7146/se.v2i2.8025.

Harvey, Lawrence. “Improving Models for Urban Soundscape Systems.” Sound Eﬀects 3, no. 3

(2013): 113-137. https://doi.org/10.7146/se.v3i3.18444.

Harvey, Lawrence, and Jules Moloney. “Resounding Cities: Acoustic Ecology and Games

Technologies.” In Building Sustainable Communities: Environmental Justice and Global Citizenship,

edited by J. D. Wulfhorst and Anne K. Haugestad, 181-196. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2006.

Hellström, Björn. Noise Design: Architectural Modelling and the Aesthetics of Urban Acoustic Space.

Göteborg: Bo Ejeby Forlag, 2003.

Hellström, Björn. “The Sonic Identity of European Cities: a Presentation of the Work Conducted by

the Swiss-French Researcher Pascal Amphoux.” In Soundscape Studies and Methods, edited by

Helmi Järviluoma and Gregg Wagstaﬀ, 59-82. Helsinki: The Finish Society for Ethnomusicology,

2002.

Kane, Brian. “Sound Studies Without Auditory Culture: a Critique of the Ontological Turn.” Sound

1 2 1

Studies 1, no. 1 (2015): 2-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/20551940.2015.1079063.

Kang, Jian. “Soundscape and Sound Preferences in Urban Squares: A Case Study in Sheﬃeld.”

Journal of Urban Design 10, no. 1 (2005): 61-80.

Karapostoli, Aimilia, and Nefta-Eleftheria. “Urban Soundscapes in the Historic Centre of

Thessaloniki: Sonic Architecture and Sonic Identity,” Sound Studies 4, no. 2 (2018): 162-177.

Karlsson, Henrik. “Ljudvärldar, Nya forskningsfält för musikforskare.” In Svensk tidskrift för

musikforskning (särtryck), 2000: 23-24. Quoted by Björn Hellström in Noise Design: Architectural

Modelling and the Aesthetics of Urban Acoustic Space. Göteborg: Bo Ejeby Forlag, 2003.

Kytö, Meri, Anthony Pecqueux, Jean-Paul Thibaud, and Heikki Uimonen. “Aperitif: From

Soundscape to Sound Studies — and Ambiances?” Conference discussion at the CRESSON Winter

School, Grenoble, France, 3 February, 2019. https://ehas.hypotheses.org/3509.

Kytö, Meri, Nicolas Rémy, Heikki Uimonen, Françoise Acquier, Gabriel Bérubé, Grégoire Chelkoﬀ,

Noha Gamal Said, et al. European Acoustic Heritage. Edited by Meri Kytö, Nicolas Rémy and Heikki

Uimonen. Tampere University of Applied Sciences; Phonogrammarchiv, the Austrian Academy of

Sciences; the multidisciplinary collective Escoitar; The Isle of San Simón Foundation; CRESSON,

2012. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00993848.

Lacey, Jordan, Sarah Pink, Lawrence Harvey, Xiaojun Qiu, Shanti Sumartojo, Sepei Zhao, Stephan

Moore, and Melisa Duque. RMIT Acoustic Design Innovations for Managing Motorway Traﬃc Noise

by Cancellation and Transformation. Melbourne: Transurban, 2017. https://www.transurban.com/

content/dam/transurban-pdfs/02/news/RMIT-Managing-Motorway-Noise-Report.pdf.

López Barrio, Isabel, and José Carles. “Acoustic Dimensions of Inhabited Areas: Quality Criteria.”

The Soundscape Newsletter 10 (1995): 6-8.

Mann, Steve. The Research Interview: Reﬂective Practice and Reﬂexivity in Research

Processes. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.

Marry, Solène. “Assessment of Urban Soundscapes.” Organised Sound 16, no. 3 (2011): 245-255.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355771811000252.

Marry, Solène. “Ordinary Public Space: Sound Perception Parameters in Urban Public Spaces and

Sonic Representations Associated with Urban Forms.” Sound Eﬀects 2, no. 1 (2012): 172-196.

1 2 2

Novak, David, and Matt Sakakeeny, eds. Keywords in Sound. Durham: Duke University Press, 2015.

Paquette, David. “Describing the Contemporary Sound Environment: an Analysis of Three

Approaches, Their Synthesis, and a Case Study of Commercial Drive, Vancouver, BC.” Masters

thesis, Simon Fraser University, 2004. http://summit.sfu.ca/system/ﬁles/iritems1/8672/

b51323679.pdf.

Paquette, David, and Andra McCartney. “Research in Brief: Soundwalking and the Bodily

Exploration of Places.” Canadian Journal of Communication 37, no. 1 (2012): 135-145.

Peter Elliott Architecture and Urban Design. “RMIT University Lawn Precinct,” Peter Elliott

Architecture and Urban Design. Accessed 21 February, 2019. https://peterelliott.com.au/projects/

urban-design/rmit-university-lawn-precinct.

Pinch, Trevor, and Karin Bijsterveld. “Sound Studies: New Technologies and Music.” Social Studies

of Science 24, no. 5 (2004): 635-648.

Pinch, Trevor, and Karin Bijsterveld, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Sound Studies. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2012.

Raimbault, Manon, and Danièle Dubois. “Urban Soundscapes: Experiences and Knowledge.” Cities

22, no. 5 (2005): 339-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2005.05.003.

Review of Handbook for Acoustic Ecology, edited by Barry Truax. Leonardo 13, no. 1 (1980):

83-83. https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/599331.

Schaeﬀer, Pierre. Treatise on Musical Objects: An Essay Across Disciplines. Translated by Christine

North and John Dack. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2017.

Schafer, R. Murray. The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World.

Rochester: Destiny Books, 1994.

Schafer, R. Murray, ed. The Vancouver Soundscape. Vancouver: World Soundscape Project, Simon

Fraser University, 1978.

Schön, Donald. The Reﬂective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Practice. London: Basic

Books, 1983.

Schulte-Fortkamp, Brigitte, Bennett M. Brooks, and Wade R. Bray. “Soundscape: an Approach to

Rely on Human Perception and Expertise in the Post-Modern Community Noise Era.” Acoustics

1 2 3

Today 3, no. 1 (2007): 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2961148.

Smith, Hazel, and Roger Dean. “Introduction: Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice –

Towards the Iterative Cyclic Web.” In Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice in the Creative

Arts, edited by Hazel Smith and Roger Dean, 1-38. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2015.

Stadler, Gustavus. “On Whiteness and Sound Studies.” Sounding Out!, 6 July, 2015. https://

soundstudiesblog.com/2015/07/06/on-whiteness-and-sound-studies/.

Steingo, Gavin, and Jim Sykes, eds. Remapping Sound Studies. Durham: Duke University Press,

2019.

Sterne, Jonathan, ed. The Sound Studies Reader. New York: Routledge, 2012.

Thibaud, Jean-Paul. Interview by Sophie Gleeson. 2 February, 2019.

Thibaud, Jean-Paul. “Listening to Urban Sounds.” Urbanistica, Istituto nazionale di urbanistica, no.

153 (2014): 122-126. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01560163.

Thompson, Emily. The Soundscape of Modernity: Architectural Acoustics and the Culture of

Listening in America, 1900–1933. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002.

Thulin, Samuel. “Sound Maps Matter: Expanding Cartophony.” Social & Cultural Geography 19, no.

2 (2018): 192-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2016.1266028.

Tixier, Nicolas. Interview by Sophie Gleeson. 3 February, 2019.

Torigoe, Keiko. “A Study of the World Soundscape Project.” Masters thesis, York University, 1982.

Truax, Barry. Acoustic Communication. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1984.

Truax, Barry. “Lo-Fi,” Handbook for Acoustic Ecology. Accessed 26 June, 2019. http://www.sfu.ca/

sonic-studio-webdav/handbook/Lo-Fi.html.

Truax, Barry. “Models and Strategies for Acoustic Design.” Paper presented at the Acoustic Ecology

Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, June 1998. https://www.sfu.ca/~truax/models.html.

Tschirhart, Peter. “Sound Maps and the Representation of Audible Space.” PhD thesis, University of

Virginia, 2013.

Vogiatzis, Konstantinos, and Nicolas Rémy. “From Environmental Noise Abatement to Soundscape

Creation Through Strategic Noise Mapping in Medium Urban Agglomerations in South Europe.”

1 2 4

Science of the Total Environment 482-483 (2013): 420-431.

Vogiatzis, Konstantinos, and Nicolas Rémy. “Strategic Noise Mapping of Herakleion: the Aircraft

Noise Impact as a Factor of the Int. Airport Relocation.” Noise Maps 1 (2014): 15-31.

Xiao, Jieling, Lisa Lavia, and Jian Kang. “Towards an Agile Participatory Urban Soundscape

Planning Framework.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 61, no. 4 (2018):

1 2 5

677-698. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2017.1331843.

A P P E N D I C E S

A P P E N D I X 1 : I N T E R V I E W W I T H PA S C A L A M P H O U X

Email interview between researcher Sophie Gleeson and Pascal Amphoux, 11 November 2019.

[ENGLISH TRANSLATION]

“Dear Sophie Gleeson

I’m answering [the received interview questions] between the lines, spontaneously and directly,

which seems the most simple to me.

Regards

Pascal

Question 1:

There are several ternary concepts and structures operating in the model. This includes the CVS

model, the Sonic Background, Sonic Ambience, Sonic Signal categorisation, the EMP model and

the related Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria.

How were these ternary structures developed? Were these structures developed independently

from the Sonic Identity guide, or during the development of the sonic identity guide?

Answer:

Both. Ternary models are a way for me to guarantee to escape from binary models, which are

the dominant models of representation in our so-called cartesian cultures: objective/

subjective, good/bad, positive/negative, etc.

If we seek to understand how my subjectivity can be shared with others, how the good for

1 2 6

ones is the greatest harm for others, or how something can be positive in some situations and

totally negative in others (the sound), then it is absolutely necessary to escape these ideas of

opposition. That is what I have been doing for 30 years in the most diﬀerent works.

However, the one that was for me the most decisive and central, was the distinction between

Environment and Landscape, that I developed during my work on sound. The logic Known

Experienced Sensitive (Connu Vécu Sensible) had appeared upstream in anthropological

works on the prospective and the evolution of lifestyles. The Repertoire of Qualitative Criteria

was structured jointly. But other models appeared in other areas thereafter (polarity, mix,

intensity in work on density, mobility movement emotion in works on mobility, etc.)

Question 2:

When attending the Winter School Workshop at CRESSON, I noticed that several researchers use

the terms discussed in the Sonic Identity guide when discussing other matters, such as ’passage’

and, of course “ambiance.” I understand ambiance is a complex and central concept in research at

CRESSON. In the Sonic Identity guide, ‘ambiance’ correlates to Pierre Schaeﬀer’s ‘attending’

listening mode.

Is your use and definition of the word “ambience” in the Sonic Identity guide similar or different

to Jean-Paul Thibaud’s writing on ambiance?

Answer:

Diﬀerent, naturally, but nevertheless compatible and complementary. The ambience, when I

situate it between the background sound and the sound signal is also a third included in a

ternary system (which lies between the distinct signal and the indistinct background sound,

which is both near and far, we understand that it is not incompatible with the more

anthropological deﬁnitions from JPT). The Ambience (singular form with capital letter) is for me

a moment of convergence between my three listening postures (environmental, medial and

landscape, i.e. conscious unconscious and meditative, and we understand once again that is

not incompatible).

The only dispute, but which paradoxically brings us closer, is the idea of ‘ordinary ambience’,

dear to Jean-Paul Thibaud, for whom there can’t be no ambience, whereas for me, there could

only be an extra-ordinary Ambience. The ambience would arise only when there is an

awareness of a singular situation that is beyond our control and that is, as a matter of

principle, out of the ordinary. (In my vocabulary, when we remain in ordinary perception, we

remain in a ‘medial’ listening, ﬂoating, unconscious, and the ordinary ambience of JPT is

nothing else than what I call the background sound, i.e. all the sounds I don’t hear because I

1 2 7

am in action and inside it).

Question 3:

In the guide epilogue, you discuss the need for an ‘urban sonic designer’ - a new discipline.

Do you believe that discipline now exists? If yes, are you aware of any practitioners operating in

this ﬁeld?

Answer:

This was written when sound designers appeared alongside light designers. Recent

developments have shown that there is a lot of lighting designers and they have become an

urban profession in their own, while this is not true for sound designers (I don't think urban

sound designers exist, even though we are some to promote reﬂections in the form of studies

that go in this direction. But the profession as such, in fact does not exist, or remains conﬁned

to actions or studies ad hoc interesting but not recognised by a wide audience).

Question 4:

Over the past 26 years, since the work was published in 1993, has the ‘guide’ developed or

changed in any way?

Answer:

No. It is periodically rediscovered. What is true is that the technical means of recording, editing

and the sound ﬁdelity have improved incredibly and allow to produce quality sound

documents inﬁnitely faster. But at the same time, the new generations who are passionate

about these techniques remain amazed at the theoretical production at the time of this work

and at the descriptive and conceptual tools that constitute, for example, the repertoire of

sound eﬀects or the repertoire of qualitative sound criteria. Hence a continuing interest in this

1 2 8

work, despite the lack of oﬃcial publication.

Question 5:

The model is very practical and oﬀers clear tools for its use. I am curious about how the model has

been used in practice - in research or creative design. This is a two part question:

Question 5 (A):

Since the development of the model in 1993, and the study of three Swiss cities, have you

continued to apply the model, or concepts from the model, in your own research?

Answer:

Yes and No once again. It is clear that EMP remains an operating structure in all my urban

project activity. I always try to think about the project in three ways: it has to be used for

something (functionally), it has to induce interesting uses (socially) and it has to contribute to a

renewal of perception (signiﬁcantly or even aesthetically). Similarly, in these projects, the

sound part is never separated from the other dimensions of the urban project so that it can

never be considered as an "applied" research (there is no application possible); however, the

model "involves" another way of doing things (at least always consider together the

relationship between Environment, Landscape (Milieu Paysage), or functional, social or

sensitive issues).

Question 5 (B):

Are you aware of how the model has been used by other researchers and practitioners?

Answer:

Not very well, no doubt!

Over the past ﬁfteen years working for architecture schools, many people tell me they have

followed the rule of hybridisation Functional Sensitive Social (and this is for me a great sign of

recognition and subject of satisfaction, because I really think that behind this trilogy there is a

condition of the ecology of the future - that if everyone is completely distraught by the

demands of an ecological transition, it is because everyone focuses on the technical and

functional dimension (thinking that it would be enough to remove this or that to meet the

technical requirements of production of zero carbon or other), at the expense of the medial

dimensions and especially the landscape dimensions, sensitive or aesthetics (how can we

1 2 9

imagine bringing all cultures or societies in tune with the same measure ?!!!!)

Question 6:

You note that the “sonic identity” is by principle unattainable.

Over the past 26 years, have you changed your opinion on this, or come close to attaining what

you believe to be the sonic identity of a place?

Answer:

No I do not change my mind, it is not a question of opinion but rather of epistemological

posture. This notion is very dangerous if we make it a deﬁned category (all the 'identity'

movements, regionalists, nationalists or others, that will exclude the foreigner, the migrant or

much more seriously and simply the other, under precisely the title identity that would be

threatened by the intruder). The identity is very interesting if we consider it as an unattainable

horizon because it is always mobile, always dynamic and always renewed (for example by the

intrusions of one or the other). This is true for the notion of identity per se. It is of course also

the sound identity (cf. a small text on sound identity and sound ecology).

Question 7:

What concepts/areas do you currently focus on in your research and practice?

Answer:

There are too many to be cited and each project, in principle, is an opportunity to develop a

new concept.

For the latter, I wonder about the idea of franchise territory (a reinterpretation of the old free

zone between two customs for ecological transition purposes).”

1 3 0

------------------ [END] ------------------

[ORIGINAL FRENCH RESPONSES]

“Chère Sophie Gleeson

Je réponds donc entre les lignes de manière directe et spontanée c'est je pense le plus simple

Bien cordialement

Pascal

Question 1 :

Plusieurs concepts et structures ternaires interviennent dans le modèle. Cela inclut le modèle CVS,

l’arrière-plan sonore, l’ambiance sonore, la catégorisation du signal sonore, le modèle EMP et le

Répertoire des Critères Qualitatifs associé.

Comment ces structures ternaires ont-elles été développées ? Ont-elles été développées

indépendamment du guide Sonic Identity ou bien lors de son élaboration ?

Résponse :

Les deux. Les modèles ternaires sont pour moi un moyen de me garantir d'échapper aux

modèles de représentation dominants dans nos cultures soi-disant cartésiennes, les modèles

binaires : objectif /subjectif, bien / mal, positif / négatif, etc.

Si 'on cherche à comprendre comment ma subjectivité peut être partagée par d'autres,

comment le bien pour les uns fait le plus grand mal pour les autres, ou comment qque chose

peut être positif dans certaines situations et parfaitement négatif dans d'autres (le son), alors il

faut absolument échapper à ces logiques d'opposition, ce que je fais depuis 30 ans dans les

travaux les plus diﬀérents.

Cela étant, celui qui pour moi a été déterminant et central a été la distinction entre

Environnement Milieu et Paysage que j'ai développé à l'occasion des travaux sur le sonore. La

logique Connu Vécu Sensible était apparue en amont dans des travaux anthropologiques sur

la prospective et l'évolution de modes de vie, le répertoire des critères de qualité, qualiﬁcation,

qualitativité sonores s'y est structuré conjointement. Mais d'autres modèles sont apparus

dans d'autres domaines par la suite (polarité, mixité, intensité dans des travaux sur le densité,

1 3 1

Motricité mouvance émotion dans des travaux sur la mobilité, etc. )

Question 2 :

Lorsque j’ai assisté à l’atelier de l’École d’hiver du CRESSON, j’ai remarqué que plusieurs

chercheurs utilisaient les termes abordés dans le guide Sonic Identity lorsqu’ils abordaient d’autres

sujets, tels que « le passage » et bien sûr « l’ambiance ». Je comprends que l’ambiance est un

concept complexe et central dans la recherche au CRESSON. Dans le guide Sonic Identity, «

l’ambiance » correspond au mode d’écoute de Pierre Schaeﬀer.

Votre utilisation et votre définition du mot « ambiance » dans le guide Sonic Identity sont-elles

similaires ou différentes de ce qu’a écrit Jean-Paul Thibaud sur l’ambiance ?

Résponse :

Diﬀérente naturellement mais néanmoins compatible et complémentaire. L'ambiance, lorsque

je la situe entre le fond et le signal sonore est aussi un tiers inclus dans un système ternaire

(ce qui se situe entre le signal distinct et le fond sonore indistinct, ce qui est proche et lointain

à la fois, on comprend donc que ce n'est pas incompatible avec les déﬁnitions plus

antropologiques de JPT). L'Ambiance (au singulier et avec majuscule) est pour moi un moment

de convergence entre mes trois postures d'écoute (environnementale, médiale et paysagère,

c-à-d. consciente inconsciente et méditative, et l'on comprend une fois de plus que cela n'est

pas incompatible). Le seul diﬀérend, mais qui paradoxalement nous rapproche peut-être, c'est

l'idée d'"ambiance ordinaire", chère à Jean-Paul Thibaud, pour lequel il ne peut pas ne pas y a

voir d'ambiance, alors que pour moi, il ne pourrait y avoir d'Ambiance qu'extra-ordiniaire,

l'ambiance ne surgirait qu'au moment où il y a prise de conscience d'une situation singulière

qui nous échappe et qui donc, par principe, sort de l'ordinaire (dans mon vocabulaire, lorsque

l'on reste dans la perception ordinaire on reste dans une écoute "médiale", ﬂottante,

inconsciente et l'ambiance ordinaire de JPT n'est autre que ce que j''appelle moi le milieu

sonore, c-à-d- l'ensemble des sons que jen'entends pas parce que je suis en acte et enfoui

1 3 2

dedans)

Question 3 :

Dans l’épilogue du guide, vous parlez de la nécessité d’un « concepteur sonore urbain » - comme

une nouvelle spécialité.

Pensez-vous que cette spécialité existe maintenant ? Si oui, connaissez-vous des professionnels

opérant dans ce domaine ?

Résponse :

Cela a été écrit au moment où des concepteurs sonores apparaissaient parallèlement à des

concepteurs lumière. L'évolution récente a montré que les concepteurs lumières se sont

répandus et sont devenus un métier de l'urbain à part entière, alors que ce n'est pas vrai des

concepteurs sonores (je ne crois pas qu'il exste de concepteurs sonores urbain, même si nous

sommes qques-uns à promouvoir des réﬂexions sous formes d'études qui vont dans ce sens.

Mai sle métier en tant que tel, de fait n'existe pas, ou reste cantonné à des actions ou études

ponctuelles intéressantes mais non reconnues dans un public élargi

Question 4 :

Au cours des 26 dernières années, depuis la publication de votre travail en 1993, le ‘guide’ a-t-il

été développé ou modifié de quelque manière que ce soit ?

Résponse :

Non. Il est périodiquement redécouvert. Ce qui est vrai, c'est que les moyens techniques

d'enregistrement, de montage et de ﬁdélité du son se sont incroyablement améliorés et

permettent de produire des documents sonores de qualité inﬁniment plus vite. Mais en même

temps, les générations nouvelles qui se passionnent pour ces techniques restent étonnées de

la production théorique de l'époque et des outils descriptifs et conceptuels que constituent

par exemple le répertoire des eﬀets sonores ou le répertoire des critères qualitatifs sonores.

1 3 3

D'où un intérêt persistant sur ces travaux, malgré l'absence de publication oﬃcielle

Question 5 :

Le modèle est très pratique et propose des outils clairs pour son utilisation. Je suis curieuse de

savoir comment le modèle a été utilisé dans la pratique - en recherche ou en création. Ceci est une

question en deux parties :

Question 5 (A) :

Depuis le développement du modèle en 1993 et l'étude de trois villes suisses, avez-vous

continué à appliquer ce modèle, ou les concepts du modèle, dans vos propres recherches ?

Résponse :

Oui et non une fois de plus. Il est clair que EMP reste une structure opératoire dans toute mon

activité de projet urbain. Je m'eﬀorce toujours de réﬂéchir le projet dans les trois modalités : il

faut qu'il serve à quelque chose (fonctionnellement), il faut qu'il induise des usages

intéressants (socialement) et il faut qu'il contribue à un renouveau de la perception

(sensiblement voire esthétiquement). De même dans ces projets, la part sonore n'est jamais

séparée des autres dimensions du projet urbain de sorte que l'on ne peut jamais considérer

qu'il s'agisse d'une recherche "appliquée" (il n'y a pas d'application possible); par contre, le

modèle "implique" une autre manière de faire projet (ne serait-ce que de toujours considérer

conjointement le rapport Environnement, Milieu Paysage, ou les enjeux fonctionnels, sociaux

ou sensibles)

Question 5 (B) :

Savez-vous comment le modèle a été utilisé par d'autres chercheurs et professionnels ?

Résponse :

Pas bien sans doute ! A travers une quinzaine d'années au service des écoles d'architecture,

Beaucoup me disent être emprunts de la règle d'hybridation Fonctionnel Social sensible (et

c'est pour moi un grand signe de reconnaissance et sujet de satisfaction, car je pense

réellement qu'il y a derrière cette trilogie une condition de l'écologie du futur – que si tout le

monde est complètement désemparé devant les exigences d'une transition écologique, c'est

parce que chacun se focalise sur la dimension technico-fonctionnelle et environnementale des

choses (en pensant qu'il suﬃrait de supprimer ceci ou cela pour répondre à des impératifs

1 3 4

techniques de production de zéro carbonne ou autre), au détriment des dimensions médiales

et surtout des dimensions paysagères, sensibles ou esthétiques (comment peut-on imaginer

mettre toutes les cultures ou sociétés au diapason d'une même mesure ?!!!!)

Question 6 :

Vous notez que « l'identité sonore » est par principe inaccessible.

Au cours des 26 dernières années, avez-vous changé d’opinion à ce sujet ou êtes-vous sur le

point d’atteindre ce que vous pensez être l’identité sonore d’un lieu ?

Résponse 6 :

Non je ne change pas d'avis, ce n'est pas une question d'avis mais plutôt de posture

épistémologique. Cette notion est très dangereuse si l'on en fait une catégorie déﬁnie (ce sont

tous les mouvements "identitaires", régionalistes, nationalistes ou autres, qui vont exclure

l'étranger, le migrant ou beaucoup plus grave et simplement l'autre, au titre justement d'une

identité qui serait menacée par l'intrus). Elle est très intéressante si on la considère comme un

horizon inatteignable parce que toujours mobile, toujours dynamique et toujours renouvelé

(par exemple par les intrusions des uns ou des autres). Ceci est vrai de la notion d'identité en

soi. ça l'est naturellement aussi de l'identité sonore (cf. un petit texte je crois sur l'identité

sonore et l'écologie sonore)

Question 7 :

Sur quels concepts / domaines vous concentrez-vous actuellement dans votre travail de

recherche et votre activité ?

Résponse 7 :

Il y en atrop pour être cités et chaque projet, en principe, est l'occasion de développer tel ou

tel concept nouveau

Pour les derniers, je m'interroge sur l'idée de territoire de franchises (une réinterprétation de

l'ancienne zone franche entre deux douanes à des ﬁns de transition écologique)”

1 3 5

------------------ [FIN] ------------------

APP EN DIX 2 : LOCAL NON-W ESTERN SOUND AND

EN VI RONMENT PRACTICE

A preliminary list of local publications, research projects and creative works in Australia.

Publications

Jane Belfrage, “The Great Australian Silence: Knowing, Colonising and Gendering Acoustic Space

(Masters thesis, La Trobe University, 1993).

These examining listening as a knowledge practice, Indigenous oral knowledge practices in

Australia, and the colonisation and decolonisation of acoustic space in Australia.

Laklak Burarrwanga, Ritjilili Ganambarr, Merrkiyawuy Ganambarr-Stubbs, Banbapuy Ganambarr,

Djawundil Maymuru, Sarah Wright, Sandie Suchet-Pearson, and Kate Lloyd, Songspirals: sharing

women's wisdom of Country through songlines. (Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, 2019).

Book by Gay'wu Group of Women from North East Arnhem Land on Songspirals, which are

sung by Aboriginal people to awaken connections between people and place.

Laura Brearley, Gulpa Ngawal Indigenous Deep Listening, (Melbourne: RMIT, 2010).

Book on “Gulpa Ngawal,” the Yorta Yorta name for “Deep Listening.” Explores Deep Listening

as a research methodology and as a way of being together.

Megan Stronarch, and Daryl Adair, “Dadirri: Reﬂections on a Research Methodology Used to Build

Trust between a Non-Indigenous Researcher and Indigenous Participants,” Cosmopolitan Civil

Societies Journal 6, no. 2 (2014): 117-134, https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v6i2.3859.

Article reﬂecting on the non-Indigenous researcher’s use of the Indigenous “Dadirri”

methodology in her PhD research project. The article includes an informative list of Indigenous

1 3 6

deep listening philosophies and methodologies.

Miriam-Rose Ungunmerr, “To be listened to in her teaching: Dadirri: Inner Deep Listening and Quiet

Still Awareness,” in EarthSong Journal: Perspectives in Ecology, Spirituality and Education 3, no. 4

(2017): 14-15.

Introduction to “Dadirri,” a way of life and practice of inner, deep listening, and quiet stillness

and the waiting. Written by Miriam-Rose Ungunmerr, an Aboriginal elder from nauiyu (Daly

River).

Roianne West, Lee Stewart, Kim Foster, and Kim Usher, “Through a Critical Lens: Indigenist

Research and the Dadirri Method,” in Qualitative Health Research 22, no. 11 (2012): 1582-1590,

https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312457596.

Overview of “Dadirri” as a methodology for indigenous researchers and scholars to link critical

theory with reﬂective practice.

Ros Bandt, “Hearing Australian Identity: Sites as Acoustic Spaces, an Audible Polyphony,” The

Australian Sound Design Project, last modiﬁed 16 July, 2001, http://

www.sounddesign.unimelb.edu.au/site/NationPaper/NationPaper.html.

Discussion of the complex notion of “identity” in Australia and how this notion may be

expressed and better understood through listening and the use of sound installations. Article

includes an overview of three sound installations designed by the author.

Research Projects & Creative Works

Farhad Bandesh, Farhad Rahmati, Samad Abdul, Shamindan Kanapathi, Thanush Selvraj, Yasin

Abdallah, Abdul Aziz Muhamat, Behrouz Boochani, Kazem Kazemi, Michael Green, André Dao, and

Jon Tjhia, “How Are You Today: Listening to the Manus Recording Project Collective,” creative work,

19-28 October, 2018, https://liquidarchitecture.org.au/events/how-are-you-today-listening-to-the-

manus-recording-project-collective.

Farhad Bandesh, Farhad Rahmati, Samad Abdul, Shamindan Kanapathi, Thanush Selvraj, Yasin

Abdallah, Abdul Aziz Muhamat, Behrouz Boochani, Kazem Kazemi, Michael Green, André Dao, and

Jon Tjhia, “Manus Recording Project Collective: Where Are You Today,” creative work, 1-30 August,

2020, https://liquidarchitecture.org.au/events/where-are-you-today.

Two creative works by Manus Recording Project Collective. The collective documents, shares

and circulates audio recordings from inside Australia’s detention centres for refugees and

1 3 7

asylum seekers.

“Flow (2018-ongoing),” Allan Giddy Active Public Art, last modiﬁed 22 February 2019, http://

allangiddy.org/?p=943.

Participatory audio installation. Relays audio recordings of messages and stories told by First

Nations children in Australia and overseas into riverbeds and water systems in Australia and

New Zealand. Participants can hear the recordings through use of a hollow stick, with one end

placed on the ear and the other placed in the water.

Kerrie O’Brien, “‘It is Possible to go in There and Forget Yourself’: Bringing Back the Art of Deep

Listening,” Sydney Morning Herald, 4 March, 2020, https://www.smh.com.au/culture/theatre/it-is-

possible-to-go-in-there-and-forget-yourself-bringing-back-the-art-of-deep-listening-20200303-

p546bz.html.

Blak Box, a “Dadirri” or deep listening installation project (2018-2020) curated by Daniel

Browning. Blak Box tells Indigenous stories through use of sound, storytelling and lighting.

Laniyuk, and AM Kanngieser, “Unwelcomed____,” Workshop, Un-ear-thing, Liquid Architecture, 12

August, 2020, https://liquidarchitecture.org.au/events/unwelcomed.

Workshop by AM Kanngieser and curated by Liquid Architecture and Debris Facility held on 12

August, 2020, exploring what it means to be unwelcome on and by land, as a non-Indigenous

person, and what it means to listen.

“Listening to Country,” Listening to Country, Griﬃth University, University of Melbourne, University of

the Sunshine Coast, accessed 2 February, 2020, http://www.listeningtocountry.com/.

Sarah Woodland, Vicki Saunders, Bianca Beetson, and Leah Barclay, “Listening to Country:

Exploring the Value of Acoustic Ecology with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women in Prison,”

in Soundscape: the Journal of the World Forum for Acoustic Ecology 17 (2019): 41-44.

Ongoing arts-led interdisciplinary research project investigating the potential value of acoustic

ecology in promoting cultural connection, maintenance and wellbeing among Aboriginal and

Torres Strait Islander women in prison.

“Listening in the Wild,” Horizon Festival 2020, accessed 8 July, 2020, https://

www.listeninginthewild.com/.

Deep listening soundscape event along the Maroochy River in Queensland, Australia, by artists

1 3 8

Lyndon Davis, Leah Barclay and Tricia King. Commissioned for Horizon Festival 2020.

“Wetland Wander,” Fernanda Adame, Leah Barclay, James Cunningham and Suzon Fuks, August,

2018, http://wetlandwander.net/.

Drawing on knowledge from traditional land owners in Quandamooka (Moreton Bay) and

Nywaigi, Gulgnay and Girramay countries (Cardwell to Ingham, Queensland, Australia), this

collaborative art-science project studies and communicates knowledge on local wetland

environments in Queensland, Australia to the public through the use of slow walks, audio

1 3 9

recordings and paintings.

APPENDIX 3: THE “SONIC WORLD” & THE EMP MODEL

Figure 7: Pascal Amphoux’s perspective towards the “Sonic World,” presented through a fractal

structuring of its Environment, Milieu and Landscape dimensions. These dimensions comprise

the EMP Model. This ﬁgure is borrowed from Hellström’s Noise Design publication and

eeee

emmm

meem

eeee

eeem

emme

mmme

mmmm

memm

meee

meme

emm

eem

eme

mmm

eee

mee

mem

mme

Orientation

Publicity

Scale

Artiﬁcialisation

Trivialisation

Privatisation

Metropolisation

Collective memory

eeep

emmp

memp

eeep

mmmp

meep

SPATIO-TEMPORAL

EVALUATION

IDEALISATION

SEMANTIC-CULTURAL

empe

empm

eepe

eepm

mepe

mepm

emp

eep

mmp

mep

ENVIRONMENTAL

Atemporality

Naturalisation

Stigmatisation

Naturality / Insecurity

QUALIFICATION OF MILIEU

QUALITY

empp

eepp

mepp

epme

mpee

epmm

epee

epem

mpme

mpem

mpmm

epm

mpm

epe

mpe

Sonic

Reverberation

Signature

Visualisation

Aesthetisation

SONIC WORLD

mpmp

emep

empp

mpep

IMAGINATION

SONIC MATERIAL

eppe

eppm

epp

mpp

Sonic

Fabrication

Metabolism

eppp

peee

peem

pmee

pmem

pme

pmm

pee

pem

Typicity

Rarity

(sense of-) Internalisation

(sense of-) Belonging

peep

pmep

REPRESENTATIVENESS

EXPRESSIVENESS

pmp

pep

(sense of-) Immersion

Authenticity

QUALITATIVENESS OF LANDSCAPE

ppe

ppm

Schizophony

Symphony

REFLEXIVENESS

ppp

Eidophony

1 4 0

substantially augmented here to include all Qualitative Criteria from the EMP Model.

eeee

emmm

meem

eeee

eeem

emme

mmme

mmmm

memm

meee

meme

emm

eem

eme

mmm

eee

mee

mem

mme

Orientation

Publicity

Scale

Artiﬁcialisation

Trivialisation

Privatisation

Metropolisation

Collective memory

eeep

emmp

memp

eeep

mmmp

meep

SPATIO-TEMPORAL

EVALUATION

IDEALISATION

SEMANTIC-CULTURAL

empe

empm

eepe

eepm

mepe

mepm

emp

eep

mmp

mep

QUALIFICATION

ENVIRONMENTAL

Atemporality

Naturalisation

Stigmatisation

Naturality / Insecurity

OF MILIEU

QUALITY

empp

eepp

mepp

epme

mpee

epmm

epee

epem

mpme

mpem

mpmm

epm

mpm

epe

mpe

Sonic

Reverberation

Signature

Visualisation

Aesthetisation

Figure 7 in Detail: Environment (“E”) Dimension of the EMP Model and its Qualitative Criteria

SONIC WORLD

mpmp

emep

empp

mpep

IMAGINATION

SONIC MATERIAL

eppe

eppm

epp

mpp

Sonic

Fabrication

Metabolism

eppp

peee

peem

pmee

pmem

pme

pmm

pee

pem

(sense of-)

Typicity

Rarity

(sense of-) Internalisation

Belonging

peep

pmep

REPRESENTATIVENESS

EXPRESSIVENESS

pmp

pep

(sense of-)

QUALITATIVENESS

Immersion

Authenticity

OF LANDSCAPE

1 4 1

ppe

ppm

Schizophony

Symphony

REFLEXIVENESS

ppp

Eidophony

eeee

emmm

meem

eeee

eeem

emme

mmme

mmmm

memm

meee

meme

emm

eem

eme

mmm

eee

mee

mem

mme

Orientation

Publicity

Scale

Artiﬁcialisation

Trivialisation

Privatisation

Metropolisation

Collective memory

eeep

emmp

memp

eeep

mmmp

meep

SPATIO-TEMPORAL

EVALUATION

IDEALISATION

SEMANTIC-CULTURAL

empe

empm

eepe

eepm

mepe

mepm

emp

eep

mmp

mep

QUALIFICATION

ENVIRONMENTAL

Naturality /

Atemporality

Naturalisation

Stigmatisation

Insecurity

OF MILIEU

QUALITY

empp

eepp

mepp

epme

mpee

epmm

epee

epem

mpme

mpem

mpmm

epm

mpm

epe

mpe

Sonic

Reverberation

Signature

Visualisation

Aesthetisation

SONIC WORLD

mpmp

emep

empp

mpep

IMAGINATION

SONIC MATERIAL

eppe

eppm

epp

mpp

Sonic

Fabrication

Metabolism

eppp

peee

peem

pmee

pmem

pme

pmm

pee

pem

Typicity

Rarity

(sense of-) Internalisation

(sense of-) Belonging

peep

pmep

REPRESENTATIVENESS

EXPRESSIVENESS

pmp

pep

QUALITATIVENESS

(sense of-) Immersion

Authenticity

OF LANDSCAPE

1 4 2

ppe

ppm

Schizophony

Symphony

REFLEXIVENESS

ppp

Eidophony

Figure 7 in Detail: Milieu (“M”) Dimension of the EMP Model and its Qualitative Criteria

eeee

emmm

meem

eeee

eeem

emme

mmme

mmmm

memm

meee

meme

emm

eem

eme

mmm

eee

mee

mem

mme

Collective

Orientation

Publicity

Scale

Artiﬁcialisation

Trivialisation

Privatisation

Metropolisation

memory

eeep

emmp

memp

eeep

mmmp

meep

SPATIO-TEMPORAL

EVALUATION

IDEALISATION

SEMANTIC-CULTURAL

empe

empm

eepe

eepm

mepe

mepm

emp

eep

mmp

mep

QUALIFICATION

ENVIRONMENTAL

Naturality /

Atemporality

Naturalisation

Stigmatisation

Insecurity

OF MILIEU

QUALITY

empp

eepp

mepp

epme

mpee

epmm

epee

epem

mpme

mpem

mpmm

epm

mpm

epe

mpe

Sonic

SONIC

Reverberation

Signature

Visualisation

Aesthetisation

WORLD

mpmp

emep

empp

mpep

IMAGINATION

SONIC MATERIAL

eppe

eppm

epp

mpp

Sonic

Fabrication

Metabolism

eppp

peee

peem

pmee

pmem

pme

pmm

pee

pem

Typicity

Rarity

(sense of-) Internalisation

(sense of-) Belonging

peep

pmep

REPRESENTATIVENESS

EXPRESSIVENESS

pmp

pep

QUALITATIVENESS

(sense of-) Immersion

Authenticity

OF LANDSCAPE

ppe

ppm

Schizophony

Symphony

REFLEXIVENESS

ppp

Eidophony

1 4 3

Figure 7 in Detail: Landscape (“P”) Dimension of the EMP Model and its Qualitative Criteria

APPENDIX 4: PROJECT WORK INVENTORY

This table catalogues the material produced across phases one to four of project work. It tallies

the amount of data collected, the word counts of documents produced through each phase, and

the audio material captured.

PROJECT WORK INVENTORY TOTAL COUCH STUDY SPACE UNIVERSITY LAWN

PHASE 1: IN-SITU SITE DOCUMENTATION

Number of site documentations (and Phase 1 documents)

17

Data collected:

0

9

・ Free-form in-situ sonic mind maps

17

・ Time-based in-situ sonic mind maps

219

147

・ Sound commentary notes

・ Number of diﬀerent sound types categorised into Sonic

101

Composition orders across documentation

・ Number of diﬀerent Sonic Eﬀects expressed across

64

documentation

Word count for Phase 1 documentations

7331

10614

17945

PHASE 2: SYSTEMISATION & FIRST ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

Word count for Phase 2 documentations

7683

7979

15662

PHASE 3: FINAL ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

Word count for Phase 3 documentations

10592

10992

21584

PHASE 4: MULTIMODAL REPRESENTATION OF THE RESULTS

Number of multi-channel audio recordings of site

6

Number of stereo/mono audio recordings of site

—

2

Word count for Phase 4 documentations

2764

2664

5428

1 4 4

APPENDIX 5: SITE INVESTIGATION PROJECT SONIC MAPS

1 4 5

Image 3 in Detail: Time-based In-situ Sonic Mind Map, University Lawn, 4 August 2019

1 4 6

Image 4 in Detail: Free-form In-situ Sonic Mind Map, Couch Study Space, 6 August 2019

1 4 7

Image 5 in Detail: Timeline of Time-based In-situ Sonic Mind Map in Image 3, University Lawn

1 4 8

Image 6 in Detail: Composite Sonic Composition Map, Couch Study Space

1 4 9

Image 7 in Detail: Composite Sonic Composition Map, University Lawn

APP EN DIX 6 : RESEARCH ETHICS APPROVAL

College Human Ethics Advisory Network (CHEAN) College of Design and Social Context (DSC) NHMRC Code: EC00237

Notice of Approval

14 January 2019

CHEAN B 21900-01/19

Date: Project number: Project title:

‘SONIC TRANSFORMATIONS OF SITE IDENTITY: Approaching Sound Design for the Built Environment'

Low risk

Associate Professor Lawrence Harvey

Approved

From: 14 January 2019

To: 31 January 2020

Risk classification: Chief investigator: Status: Approval period: The following documents have been reviewed and approved:

Title

Risk Assessment and Application Form Interview Consent Interview Consent FR Interview Consent JL OBs Participation Information Form Example Observation Data Form Participant Recruitment Emails

Version 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Date 21.12.2018 21.12.2018 21.12.2018 21.12.2018 21.12.2018 21.12.2018 21.12.2018

The above application has been approved by the RMIT University CHEAN as it meets the requirements of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (NHMRC, 2007). Terms of approval:

1. Responsibilities of chief investigator

It is the responsibility of the above chief investigator to ensure that all other investigators and staff on a project are aware of the terms of approval and to ensure that the project is conducted as approved by CHEAN. Approval is valid only whilst the chief investigator holds a position at RMIT University. 2. Amendments

Approval must be sought from CHEAN to amend any aspect of a project. To apply for an amendment, use the request for amendment form, which is available on the HREC website and submitted to the CHEAN secretary. Amendments must not be implemented without first gaining approval from CHEAN.

3. Adverse events

K:\R and I\Research Office\Human Ethics_RM\HE_DSC\2018 Applications\21900 - L Harvey\CHEAN B 21900-01-19, AProf L Harvey_Notice of Human Research Ethics Approval.docx

1 5 0

College Human Ethics Advisory Network (CHEAN) College of Design and Social Context (DSC) NHMRC Code: EC00237

You should notify the CHEAN immediately (within 24 hours) of any serious or unanticipated adverse effects of their research on participants, and unforeseen events that might affect the ethical acceptability of the project.

4. Annual reports

Continued approval of this project is dependent on the submission of an annual report. Annual reports must be submitted by the anniversary of approval of the project for each full year of the project. If the project is of less than 12 months duration, then a final report only is required.

5. Final report

A final report must be provided within six months of the end of the project. CHEAN must be notified if the project is discontinued before the expected date of completion.

6. Monitoring

Projects may be subject to an audit or any other form of monitoring by the CHEAN at any time.

7. Retention and storage of data

The investigator is responsible for the storage and retention of original data according to the requirements of the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (R22) and relevant RMIT policies.

8. Special conditions of approval

Nil.

In any future correspondence please quote the project number and project title above. Associate Professor Marsha Berry Chairperson, College Human Ethics Advisory Network (CHEAN B) RMIT University Dr Seth Brown Deputy Chairperson, College Human Ethics Advisory Network (CHEAN A) RMIT University cc:

Dr David Blades (CHEAN secretary) Ms Sophie Gleeson (Co-investigator) Dr Lisa Dethridge (Co-investigator)

K:\R and I\Research Office\Human Ethics_RM\HE_DSC\2018 Applications\21900 - L Harvey\CHEAN B 21900-01-19, AProf L Harvey_Notice of Human Research Ethics Approval.docx

1 5 1