Methods - Soundscape Ecology: Principles, Patterns, Methods and Applications - page 250

therapeutic effect that people hope to find in it. The simple measure of the sound
pressure level (SPL) is not sufficient to evaluate the quality of the environment, and
acoustic comfort is a parameter that is not sufficiently popular in urban monitoring.
Often the acoustic comfort, and more in general the benefits that visitors hope to
find, in a green urban space can be misinterpreted by other co-factors. For instance,
prostitution, vagrancy, or water pollution are factors not directly related to the sonic
environment but that decrease the total rating, as found by Szeremeta and Zannin
( 2009 ) after interviews on the state of noise level in a public urban park in Curitiba
(Brazil). From this study emerges the realization that the collection of sound levels
or the level of human-perceived comfort are not sufficient to assess the real comfort
of an area: to make a realistic assessment it is necessary to combine acoustic
pressure level with human perception.
For instance, Gustavino ( 2006 ) submitted a questionnaire composed of five main
questions:
1. According to you, what would be the ideal urban soundscape?
2. In your urban sonic environment, what do you find pleasant/unpleasant?
3. In your urban sonic environment, are there high-pitched /low-pitched sounds? If
so, describe them.
4. Do you perceive background noise in urban environments? Is so, under which
circumstances? How would you describe it?
5. In urban areas, are you sensitive to transportation noise? Describe its
characteristics?
This questionnaire proposed with questions scored according to most general
to most particular, was posted to a group of inhabitants of Paris, Lyon, and
Nantes.
The reaction of people using the semantic of sounds was positioned on the
positive site for most identified sounds with the exception of mechanical sounds
such as traffic, cars, construction work, car horns, and unidentified noise (Fig. 9.20 ).
Four sound quality descriptors emerged: variety (38 %), tranquility (30 %),
animation (20 %), and non-aggressiveness (12 %). Variety means the contribution
of a great variety of sounds that can be located inside a well-structured environ-
ment. Tranquility does not mean the absence of sound but the absence of noise.
Animation refers to the human activity in a lively city where people have different
functions blended into a public space. Finally, non-aggressiveness means a sonic
environment without social tension or individual anomalous behavior.
About the second question, most of the judgment was expressed in a negative
way (cars, motorcycles, other vehicles, car horns, background noise). Positive
perception was focused on other people, nature, birds, and music.
The sources of sound/noise are mediated by personal judgment. Thus, public
transportation is considered less harmful than private personal vehicles, and this
creates a cognitive representation of the sonic ambience that reflects personal
culture and personal expectations for a public space. The qualitative evaluation is
not directly related to the physical properties of the heard sounds but to the
cognitive template that elaborates and processes the sound.