Page 31 - Spring 2019
P. 31

6, ‘Z
9'
6 5%; “go 5%‘ 5
eye; as’ 0 » 634»
A 9»  Ce”
6% 9%’ Q, Q
oer. $1
6 O
"9 ‘” :1
he .§§
E Q, s O
5- a
WHEEL or ¢
CONCERT HALL dynamic my
W ACOUSTICS
‘#5 “I No
\\aV9“¢S ii an ""9
5 4:
&gl»°‘\°“ A5 3%
xv“ A?’ “L “Q
1° °«:
3” ‘e
kg R 9a
KB ‘S 1
§ .3 ‘‘‘r
s° E ‘é ‘% %
“’ 2 E '2, 3%
.. a $0 1
Figure 1. “Wheel nfcancert hau ucnustics." The gmphic pmpnses a cammnn vncubulmyfar eight primary uttributes (inner ring) nfucnustiml
pereeptian in cancert hulls, und several related saafaetars (eater ring}. sarne attributes in the enter ring arerzap between primary pereepts.
illustrating their interdependency. The circular nrganizutinn highlights the fact that there is net a cansensus hierarchy nfchuructeristics cnr—
related with Iistenerprefierence. anal the structure dues nat assume arthagwmlity between any pair afperceptual attributes. Fmm Kuusinen
and Lakki (2017), with permissianfram s. Hirzel Verlug.
shown in Figure 1, that groups relevant perceptual factors with the acoustical features of “shoebox” concert halls (tall,
into eight categories: clarity, reverberance, spatial i.rnpres- narrow, and rectangular), such as those in Vienna, Boston,
sion, intimacy, loudness, balance, timbre, and minimization and Amsterdam. Among other factors, the second category
of extraneous sounds. of listeners may be influenced by perceptual expectations de-
veloped from listening to recordings of classical orchestral
Although there is not yet a consensus around specific at- music rather than attending live performances (Beranek et
tributes most correlated with audience listener preference, al., 2011). However, all elements remain important to the lis-
there is agreement that different people prioritize different tening experience. Even listeners who prefer a clearer sound
elements of the acoustical experience. Several studies have still require an adequate level of loudness, reverberance, and
shown that listeners can be categorized into at least two pref- envelopment (Lokki et al., 2012). Historically, acousticians
erence groups: one that prefers louder, rnore reverberant and have considered some percepts, such as reverberance and
enveloping acoustics and another that prefers a more inti- clarity, to be in direct opposition with each other, but there is
mate and clearer sound (Lokki et al., 2012; Beranek, 2016). new emphasis on finding a common ground to engage more
The listening preferences of the first category generally align listeners.
Spring 2019 | Annuslzlcl Tnduy | es



















































   29   30   31   32   33