Methods - Soundscape Ecology: Principles, Patterns, Methods and Applications - page 249

cognitive subject than a physical one, and people have the capacity to select and
rate the different subjects that produce unpleasant or pleasant sounds. The use of
sound semantics to investigate how people perceive sounds and noise is quite
common.
Visual and aural perceptions differ in terms of physical facilitating mechanisms,
meaning that visual cues are sectorial although the soundscape is ubiquitous. Sound
has no barrier: it has a circular diffusion (all surrounding). The aural harmonization
is temporal, the visual harmonization is spatial. The visual object is a physical
entity, the acoustic subject is a field of energy that expresses meaningful informa-
tion. Sound perception may be less rich in information than the visuals but is richer
in emotion, and an intentional soundscape is an important part of design and urban
planning.
The urban soundscape assessment approach is essentially an aesthetic approach
that regards individual or group preferences.
The information contained in a sound, the context in which a sound is perceived,
and the sound level are elements that people utilize in the sound rating in a city
soundscape.
Physiological and psychological components concur to the acoustic annoyance
rating. In other words, this depends on the physiological skill of the ear, the physical
attributes of the noise, the cultural component of the listener, etc. A plethora of
experiments have demonstrated how important is the psychological component of
the hearing process, more than the physical attributes of the noise per itself. Long-
term environmental experience and cultural background may rate differently the
perceived sounds.
In conclusion, the rating in sound appreciation largely depends on the single
listener attitude. For instance, expert ornithologists can judge the song of a bird as
having great value when non-expert listeners can ignore/exclude that sound in the
rating process of a soundscape.
Yang and Kang ( 2005 ) have investigated the soundscape of two squares in the
city of Sheffield carrying out an intensive questionnaire in which sound level and
comfort were both analyzed. The questionnaire was quite general on the environ-
ment of the two squares, just to reduce the bias that can be introduced when too
specific questions or themes are proposed. During the compilation of the question-
naire (two pages), A-weighted L eq (equivalent continuous noise) and microclimate
indices were collected.
Despite the expectation, people identify first not the loudest sound but the
soundmarks as the noticed sound. The natural sounds were preferred in the two
urban squares selected by the researchers. Young people showed a tolerance toward
music and technological sound, while aged people showed more tolerance to
natural sounds and to sound related to culture or human activities. Only slight
difference was found between the sexes in sound appreciation.
Investigation about the sound quality of urban areas in many cases is the only
tool that certifies the noise exposure of visitors to urban noise when they spend time
in urban parks. Urban parks can be considered in this case real ecological traps
because they produce a visible attraction for people but they often do not offer the