SoundSmart: A Brief Survey of Sound, Noise and their Effects

SoundSmart | A Brief Survey of Sound, Noise and their Effects
- 1 -
SoundSmart
A Brief Survey of Sound, Noise and their Effects
by
Jeffrey Marino, MS
May 14, 2018
Professor Shannon Mattern, PhD
The New School
...the inner ear is an entrance to the brain, where science, technology, medicine
and humanities can meet...” [1]

- 2 -
Sleeping within my orchard…
Upon my secure hour thy uncle stole
…And in the porches of my ears did pour
The leprous distilment…
O horrible, O horrible, most horrible!
Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act I Scene V
Images from ‘The Mousetrap, a film by Hamlet,’ from the movie Hamlet (dir.
Michael Almereyda, 2000)

- 3 -
Sound is a slippery topic. Objective measurement of sound cannot describe our
subjective perception of sound: a sound does not have to be painfully loud to feel
painful. Indeed, as Charles Spurgeon preached in the 1800’s,
“Music is the sound which our own children make as they romp through the
house. Noise is the sound other people’s children make under the same
circumstances.” [2]
The goal of this paper is to explore some of the dichotomies of our life in sound –
primarily sound vs noise, and silence vs presence. We will examine some of ways we
as humans evaluate sound; review how it affects us and other living things; and
consider ideas on how we value silence and seek to control noise, all in the context of
how we perceive.
Background Noise
Not all these dichotomies are able to be considered in this paper. In no particular order,
they are:
Sound Noise Measurement Impact
Hearing Listening Health Injury
Silence Presence (of sound) Reflection Absorption
Tolerance Annoyance Loudness Pitch
Passive control Active control (of noise) Pleasant Painful
Acoustic
Engineering
Psychoacoustics Adaptation Avoidance
Comprehension Confusion Targeted Ambient
Masking Removal Background Foreground
Perception Blocking Weapon Pollution
Subjective Objective Anthropogenic Naturally occurring

- 4 -
Hearing is as fundamental to our survival as it is for any animal on our planet - land,
sea or air. Awareness of sound is a brute necessity for avoiding danger whether it is the
growling approach of the panther or the near-silent careen of the delivery bike.
Our physiology and brains are hard-wired to interpret vibrations within the frequency
range of our auditory systems and to perceive them in three-dimensional space. Sounds
convey messages that are clear (eg, words we understand), vague (like distant
thunder), or opaque and annoying (like the hum of an electrical transformer, or radio
static). Most people can agree on the meaning of a survival sound like the klaxon of a
fire truck. On the other hand, the personal significance of the police car siren, for
example, depends very much on context – your recent activity, where you are, and who
you are.
Different species listen for different messages, but our understanding is limited. And
only humans (as far as we know) question the very existence of sound – as in this
famous riddle:
“If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?”
[3]
The question, ascribed to the philosopher George Berkeley, can be answered yes or no:
it blurs the difference between sound, a phenomenon of physics, and hearing, a
physiology of animals. It also is preposterously anthropocentric. Neither tree nor forest
exist in isolation – all manner of life would perceive the tree falling. Those creatures so
attuned would hear it as sound, and those so evolved with cognition might - or might not
- listen.
Fundamentally, sound is energy that, as it propagates from its source, it interrelates with
its path, and is received at the end of that path (which is but one of many). An aware

- 5 -
receiver may hear and interpret the sound. The sound always reflects, and is always
altered over the course of its transmission.
Fig. A: Cowan, J., Handbook of Environmental Acoustics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1994, p84
Sound can be controlled at the source and along the path. But usually the need for
control is due to the receiver, because of physical or psychological effects of the sound
upon people and other living creatures, as noise.
What is Noise?
Anthropocentrically speaking, noise is a qualification of sound by an objection to it, as in
‘noise is the sound of someone else’s children.’ Tolerance for noise is highly individual
and the threshold at which it becomes ‘annoying’ is subjective. Noise as a subjective
phenomenon can be said to be a defining characteristic of civilization itself:
“…objections to undesirable sounds date back to the invention of neighbors.” [4]
The industrial revolution from the 18th
century onwards institutionalized noise as a
necessary byproduct of progress and civilization – with psychological consequences for
the modern human condition. R. Murray Schafer points out,

- 6 -
"We have split the sound from the maker of the sound. Sounds have been torn
from their natural sockets and given an amplified and independent existence.
Vocal sound, for instance, is no longer tied to a hole in the head but is free to
issue from anywhere in the landscape." [5]
Today, the sound of factories, engines, railroads and ships, automobiles and airplanes
permeates all aspects of human life - and is measurable in every known spot on earth.
Noise, as an objective phenomenon, can be said to be wholly anthrophonic (coming
from humans and civilization); biophonic (originating from other living things); and
geophonic (non-biologic in nature). [6]
The measurement of sound is expressed in units called decibels. The decibel scale is
important as an objective basis for understanding the loudness of a sound source, the
relative change of loudness along the path of the sound, and the acceptable level of
loudness at the (human) receiver. The decibel scale is objective, but it is not absolute. It
is a scale relative to human perception: its starting point is zero decibels (0 dB), where
sound energy is inaudible to the human ear; 120 dB is the loudness of sound energy
that is painful to the human ear.
Fig. B: Cowan, J., Handbook of Environmental Acoustics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1994, p37

- 7 -
Studies since the invention of the decibel (at Bell Research Labs) in the early 20th
century have helped define what the level of ‘acceptable’ loudness is for different kinds
of workplaces, products, locations and times of day and night.
In the US, willingness to measure and manage industrial noise through federal policy
has waxed and waned (mostly waned) according to the political administration in office.
The US Congress enacted the Noise Control Act in 1972, to
“promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their
health and welfare,” [7]
effectively designating noise as a pollutant to be regulated.
In the same year, the EPA established the Office of Noise Abatement and Control to set
standards on acceptable noise level and create procedures for citizens to seek
enforcement of standards. This office was shuttered, however, by the Reagan
administration in 1982, and regulation and enforcement were passed on to a long list of
federal agencies (like the FAA, HUD, FHA, Parks, etc), each according to its domain
and, quite often as the case may be, according to the interests of those businesses
supposedly being regulated. As Bronzhaft notes, Reagan’s defunding of the Office of
Noise Abatement and Control signaled that
“noise was not important. Viewing noise as personal to the listener and as simply
annoying has resulted in ignoring the potential harm of this pollutant.” [8]
Noise and Human Health
The Noise Control Act of 1972 is still in effect, though largely unenforced. Yet it did lay
the groundwork for cataloging acceptable noise levels in different situations and thereby

- 8 -
substantiating what constitutes noise pollution in the US. This chart shows, for example,
the acceptable noise levels as determined by the US Dept. of Housing and Urban
Development:
Fig. C: Cowan, J., Handbook of Environmental Acoustics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1994, p181
Note that this chart is labeled as a ‘compatibility guideline’ as it relates to properties
managed by the US Dept. of HUD. While the noise level values in it are quantitatively
significant, there are a number of assumptions embedded within, about what is ‘clearly
acceptable’ as opposed to ‘clearly unacceptable.’ It focuses on the context of different
kinds of places – not on the context of actual people and how they perceive sound, who
might have different tolerances for noise according to age and in relation to other
environmental factors. Such guidelines also define only for injury (hearing loss) from
sound in the heard spectrum (about 20 Hz to 20,0000 Hz for humans), and do not apply
to the impact of other kinds of noise on quality of life.
For example, residents of from Cleveland, Ohio to McGregor, Ontario complain about

- 9 -
headaches, sleeplessness, irritability and depression, and other symptoms resulting
from exposure to ‘The Windsor Hum,’
“A persistent noise of unknown origin, sometimes compared to a truck idling or
distant thunder, has bedeviled [Windsor] for years, damaging people’s health and
quality of life, numerous residents say.” [9]
The subsonic nature of the noise rattles windows in some places, feels like it’s from a
concert subwoofer for others, and sometimes disturbs pets. Residents complain about
headaches, sleeplessness, irritability and depression. It may be that the culprit is a steel
foundry on the Detroit River, but so far it’s been impossible to prove.
In an even more notorious case regarding disturbed health, in 2016 many staff at the
US embassy in Cuba reported incidents of strange loud sounds affecting them where
they lived. They each heard buzzing, grinding, humming or squeals, vibration and
increased air pressure. Their health symptoms seem to correlate with symptoms of
brain injury from concussion – memory problems, difficulty concentrating, mood swings,
headaches and fatigue. As with Windsor, the actual cause of this distress has so far
been impossible to determine, even with FBI agents and researchers from the
University of Pennsylvania on the case. In the end, the diplomats were recalled from
their posting for health reasons. (Note, however, that murky US – Cuba relations may
play a part in some or all aspects of this story.) [10]
New York City instituted the first comprehensive noise code in 1985, and explicitly
associates exposure to noise with health and well-being:
“The making, creation or maintenance of excessive and unreasonable and
prohibited noises within the city affects and is a menace to public health, comfort,
convenience, safety, welfare and the prosperity of the people of the city.” [11]

- 10 -
Some of the known effects of noise on human health are listed in the following chart:
Fig. D: Cowan, J., Handbook of Environmental Acoustics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1994, p43
Noise and Non-Human Health
Researchers have been studying levels of noise in the world’s oceans, especially post
World War II. Newer studies have begun charting the effects of noise on animal life
undersea, but with little conclusive data. Nonetheless, it is clear that the title of the 1953
book “The Silent World,” by ocean explorer Jacques Cousteau, is a misnomer. The
ocean is actually very noisy, with increasing levels of industrial sound generated by
ships’ propellers, sonar sweeps by fishing vessels of all sizes, detonations and drilling
for oil. High levels of anthropogenic noise and the great distances sound can travel
through water have researchers concerned that continued ‘masking’ of the natural
undersea audible environment can severely degrade marine species’ health, to the

- 11 -
point of population collapse. [12] Undersea, the loudness of whale-watching dinghies is
above the pain and injury threshold of humans. The loudness of drilling, pile driving and
air gun arrays range from 140 dB to 220 dB - far exceeding our human threshold of
injury and pain. (In the logarithm of the decibel scale, each additional 10dB represents a
tenfold increase in the magnitude of sound energy.)
Fig E: [Popper, A. N. et al (Eds.), Effects of Noise on Aquatic Life II, Springer, 2015, p18
Marine mammals such as dolphins, porpoises and whales are well known for their
complex song-making and long-distance calls and for their prowess in echolocation;
they, like humans, are both sources and receivers. It is as yet unknown what the
loudness or frequency thresholds are that would cause them pain and injury. We can
certainly infer that for marine mammals, as for all animals, those thresholds exist.
Most species of fish lack auditory organs, yet can still ‘hear’ vibrations. Ethologist and
zoologist Karl von Frisch trained catfish in his backyard pond to come when he whistled.
Field observations on the bonefish (Alular vulpes) show the fish to be more sensitive to
noises than others with comparable physiology - implying fishes ‘listen’ and ‘hear’
according to their own physiology:

- 12 -
“The ubiquitous freshwater catfish (Ameirus) and carp (Carassius: the ancestor
of the domesticated goldfish) possess a highly specialized hearing system of
Weberian ossicles, yet produce no sounds of their own and appear to live in a
quiet neighborhood. What is that fish listening to so intently? What does it need
to hear to survive?” [13]
The diagram below is a general illustration of the effects of too-loud sound on the
receiver as distance increases between receiver and the sound source (marked as a +
sign at the center of the diagram). Permanent threshold shift (PTS) is commonly known
as injury to the auditory system and hearing loss. Temporary threshold shift (TTS) refers
to hearing loss or ringing sensation that subsides over time. With Masking, the intrusive
noise interferes with communication, muddles echolocation, and obscures awareness of
predator and prey. Antimasking strategies for animals include deliberate increases in
call level, repetition, or frequency shifting. A typical antimasking technique used by
people is… shouting.
Fig. F: Popper, A. N. et al (Eds.), Effects of Noise on Aquatic Life II, Springer, 2015, p18
While data on behavioral effects of noise on marine and other animals are lacking,
stress and other health symptoms can be inferred from the human experience.

- 13 -
Behavioral effects for humans include numerous health symptoms, which policy-wise in
the EU has resulted in the passage of the European Environmental Noise Directive of
2002, to address the issue of noise pollution by establishing a common approach
among the Member States. It mandates quantitative measurements of agreed-upon
noise indicators and the creation of municipal noise maps and action plans.
According to the World Health Organization and the European Environmental
Agency, noise from road traffic constitutes the second most harmful
environmental stressor in Europe, affecting over 125 million people every year
and causing health issues, such as cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment,
sleep disturbance, hypertension and annoyance.
[14]
Quiet Activism
Researcher Antonella Radicchi’s seeks to engage with ‘Citizens As Sensors’ for
mapping urban areas of quiet, in order for those areas to become known and more
accessible to those seeking respite from city noise. Users can install the app she
developed for smartphones, called HushCity, which makes measuring and logging
sound levels easy. The tool also includes a few qualitative questions about place
surveyed. All information collected gets added to a central database, which is then
published on the map of known quiet places. Making quiet more accessible by more
people is paradoxical, in the sense that the more people who know about the quiet
places means more risk to the quiet itself; but it also increases the value of quiet, not
only through the activity of the user, who invests their time and intention, but also
through people’s attendance, as tourists of quiet. Quiet has a well-known sacred value:
people attend silent retreats both secular and in all religious denominations; tourists
respect the general hush of the temple, mosque and church during and between
prayers and services; green spaces and parklands are essential for experiencing
geophony and biophony - the natural silence of the outdoors.

- 14 -
In the Olympic National Park in the state of Washington, Gordon Hempton is known by
park rangers as “the sound guy.” He’s been measuring sound levels in the park for the
last two decades, in particular the intrusion of man-made noise into the Hoh Rain
Forest, to help preserve it as one of the quietest places earth.
Fighting noise is not the same as preserving silence. Our typical anti-noise
strategies - earplugs, noise cancelling headphones, even noise abatement laws -
offer no real solution because they do nothing to help us reconnect and listen to
the land. [15]
Hempton also has a citizen-as-sensor approach, but as a sole operator. His method is
to designate a specific place in the Hoh Rain Forest and measure sound levels at that
geolocation, an ideal One Square Inch of Silence. He is measuring loudness as well as
the time between incursions of noise. Intervals of incursion are now shorter than fifteen
minutes in this remote location, and silence is becoming extinct, he says, even at this
quietest of all possible places. Data from the even more remote Denali State Park in
Alaska corroborates this trend. Among 60 sites monitored for 6 years, researchers have
found only 36 days free of engine noise. [16]
Mitigating Noise
Mitigating noise can occur at any or all of the three parts of sound transmission: at the
source, along the path, or at the recipient. Engineering-wise, it’s most effective to
eliminate noise at the source as much as possible, by making quieter machines,
engines and appliances, and for example, using noise-dampening asphalt in roadways
[17]. Paths that are contained in buildings and rooms can incorporate architectural
barriers and absorption materials to reduce noise; barriers outdoors can only partially

- 15 -
block noise. A recipient can use earplugs or headphones, as Hempton pointed out, but
this does nothing to mitigate the actual noise that exists.
Techniques to reduce loudness are drawn from three basic categories of noise control:
passive (blocking/absorbing); active (altering); and masking (distracting).
Passive reduction involves barriers that prevent sound from traveling, as this image
illustrates:
Fig. G: Cowan, J., Handbook of Environmental Acoustics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1994, p85
Active reduction is the generation of ‘anti-noise’, a waveform inversion of the offending
sound The first image illustrates the configuration of the system with a microphone to
capture and a processor to create the anti-noise which, when mixed back into the
original (the second image), alters the signal to reduce it.

- 16 -
Fig. H: Images by Marekich,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Active_Noise_Reduction.svg, and
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Illustration-of-active-noise-control-The-
microphone-receives-the-signal-from-the-noise_fig1_323444215
Masking means introducing additional sounds that are pleasant and/or distract from the
noise. Sounds that are typically perceived as pleasant involve running water, ocean
waves, gentle wind, and birdsong. The effectiveness of these natural elements is
supported by studies on noise sensitivity/noise annoyance [18], and perceived
tranquility [19]. Given the slipperiness of noise – its subjective nature and its tendency
towards transmission, it’s rather difficult to control: solutions require combinations of
science, engineering and art. One of the most effective, and most personal solutions, is
the noise-canceling headphone, first introduced by Bose in 1989. This kind of
headphone uses both passive noise reduction (the barrier of the over-ear cup) and
active (the generation of anti-noise inside the cup).
Larger spaces require multiple methods. The graphic below is by Habitat Soundscape,
a company which installs interior waterfalls and digital windows and skylights in
conjuction with active noise-cancellation and masking systems as a comprehensive
solution for noisy work environments. The service “combines ambient sounds with lush
visuals to transform an open office into an intelligent, multisensory experience that
facilitates teamwork and enables workers to maintain focus.”

- 17 -
Fig. I: https://habitat.plantronics.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Habitat-Soundscaping-Brochure.pdf
As current trends are towards open offices which increase and amplify ambient noise,
noise in captive environments like the workplace is a real issue. In their marketing
materials, Habitat Soundscape cites from “The Cost of Interrupted Work: More Speed
and Stress Study” from the Department of Informatics, UC Irvine, that it takes 23
minutes for a worker to refocus after an interruption. [20]
The field of active noise control (ANC) continues to advance: implementations are
currently the most effective at the source, by reducing, for example, the noise and
vibration generated by engines and/or emanating from ductwork in buildings. One
company, Silentium, markets ANC technology as a solution for enclosed-cabin
installations for trains, planes and automobiles. Its ‘Quiet Bubble’ system for cars uses
multiple speakers mounted in the headrests of the front seats, and generates an anti-
noise field around the driver and front passenger. The auto manufacturer Skoda
features this system as an option, branding it ‘QuarrelKancel’ – presumably they have
market research that noisesome and distracting backseat passengers (kids?) should be
‘kanceled.’ [21]

- 18 -
Is Silence Possible?
In a world of at-will communications, where mobile devices are phones that play music,
radio, video and tv, consuming visual media is a relatively private activity. The glow of
the small screens is more or less obscured by the body of the device’s owner. All too
often the audio portion of that media spills over in public, creating an unwitting
audience, bystanders who might be able to willfully ignore the intrusion but are
physiologically unable to close their ears to the sound.
While it is only in the last ten years that mobile phones have layered millions of one-
sided conversations into the public soundscape, being annoyed by human noise has
existed for millennia:
“Sleep is no longer possible,” says the god Enlil in The Epic of Gilgamesh. (And
the gods flood the earth to quiet the noise of humankind.) [22]
In the early 1950’s, the John Cage – musician, inventor and theorist of the avant-garde -
sought absolute silence. As a practitioner of meditation he knew the experience of
quieting the mind, a condition associated with spiritual exercise (Cage was Buddhist)
and mind-over-matter. As an acoustic artist, he arranged with Harvard University to
experience an anechoic chamber, a room so well insulated and padded as to absorb all
sound energy inside.
“when I went into that sound-proof room, I really expected to hear nothing. With
no idea of what nothing would sound like. The instant I heard myself producing
two sounds, my blood circulating and my nervous system in operation, I was
stupefied.” [23]
After this, Cage created the iconic composition 4 minutes and 33 seconds; the title
refers to the duration of the performance, in which the performer produces no sound. By

- 19 -
withholding the expected delivery of music by a musician, Cage leaves it to the crowd to
create its own natural sounds. The audience may be quiet or restless, feel illuminated or
insulted, and applaud or not. Cage endeavors to show that the experience of not
making a sound does not produce silence, but embodies life.
“For in this new music nothing takes place but sounds: those that are notated
and those that are not. Those that are not notated appear in the written music as
silences, opening the doors of the music to the sounds that happen to be in the
environment.” [24]
Cage also explored the process of re-recording the recorded sound, the serendipity that
would occur from asynchronous playback of multiple recordings, and the splicing,
rearranging and mixing of recordings. Magnetic tape technology was a post-WWII
breakthrough which Cage explored as an experimental composer,
“faced not only with the entire field of sound but also with the entire field of
time…as an organizer of sound.” [25]
Decades later, modern digital capabilities of sound recording and mixing have far
outstripped the capabilities of linear magnetic tape that Cage knew. Now, with the aid of
headphones, quiet bubbles, noise codes, barriers and distractions, we are more and
more becoming ‘organizers of silence’ for ourselves and the world around us. It may be
that in the near future, with sufficient technological advancement, we may experience
the broad dissemination of anti-noise which, as it is automatically mixed back into the
original noisesome world, may in fact create an alien new kind of silence, one never
known before, heard or unheard, or maybe even listened for.

- 20 -
Fig. J: An anechoic chamber served as the spaceship for David Bowie’s
character in the 1976 film The Man Who Fell to Earth. (Photo from the cover
of Bowie’s album Station to Station, also 1976.) [26]
End Notes
[1] Rosenhouse G. (Ed.), Active Noise Control – Fundamentals for Acoustic Design, WIT Press, January
12, 2001, p 276
[2] Richards, H., The Problem of Noise, The Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, May 24, 1935, pp. 625-
637, p627
[3] Berkeley, G. (attrib.), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_a_tree_falls_in_a_forest
[4] Tingley, K., Whisper of the Wild, The New York Times, March 15, 2012,
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/magazine/is-silence-going-extinct.html
[5] Schafer, R. M., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Murray_Schafer. See also Schafer, Raymond Murray
(1977). The Tuning of the World. Random House Inc.
[6] Soundscape Ecology, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundscape_ecology
[7] Bronzhaft, A., Impact of Noise on Health: The Divide between
Policy and Science, Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2017, 5, 108-120, p 111
[8] ibid., p109-110
[9] Mele, C., There’s a Persistent Hum in This
Canadian City, and No One Knows Why, The New York Times, February 19, 2018,
https://nyti.ms/2BCZ1jS

- 21 -
[10] Kolatafeb, G., Diplomats in Cuba Suffered Brain Injuries. Experts Still Don’t Know Why, The New
York Times, February 15, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/health/cuba-diplomats-attack-
concussions.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad
[11] A Guide to New York City’s Noise Code, New York City Department of Environmental Protection,
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/noise_code_guide.pdf
[12] Popper, A. N. et al (Eds.), Effects of Noise on Aquatic Life II, Springer, November 27, 2015, p 21
[13] ibid, p13
[14] Radicchi, A. et al, Citizens as smart, active sensors for a quiet and
just city, De Gruyter, Nise Mapp, 2018; 5:1-20,
https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/noise.2018.5.issue-1/noise-2018-0001/noise-2018-0001.pdf
[15] Hempton, G., One Square Inch of Silence, Atria Books; Reprint edition (March 2, 2010), p1
[16] Tingley, K., Whisper of the Wild
[17] Vasquez, V.F. et al, Assessment of an action against environmental noise: Acoustic durability
of a pavement surface with crumb rubber, Elsevier, Science of the Total Environment 542 (2016) 223–
230
[18] Calleja, A. et al, Acoustic and economic valuation of soundscape: An application to the ‘Retiro’ Urban
Forest Park, Elsevier, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 27 (2017) 272–278
[19] Watts, G., The effects of “greening” urban areas on the perceptions of tranquility,
Elsevier, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 26 (2017) 11–17
[20] Habitat Soundscaping – Acoustics, Plantronics, https://habitat.plantronics.com/workplace/
[21] Financial Express, Cool Tech! Skoda’s noise-cancelling headrest: Backseat bickering, noisy kids no
longer a worry, April 2, 2018, http://www.financialexpress.com/auto/car-news/cool-tech-skodas-noise-
cancelling-headrest-backseat-bickering-noisy-kids-no-longer-a-worry/1118284/
[22] Keizer, G., The Unwanted Sound of Everything We Want : A Book About Noise, PublicAffairs, 2010.
ProQuest Ebook Central, p 263
[23] Larson, K., Where the Heart Beats: John Cage, Zen Buddhism, and the Inner Life of Artists, Penguin
Books; Reprint edition (July 30, 2013), p270
[24] Cage, J., Gann, K., Silence : Lectures and Writings, Wesleyan University Press, 1961, p7-8
[25} ibid., p5
[26] Broackes, V.et al (Eds.), David Bowie Is, V & A Publishing; Special edition, April 16, 2013

SoundSmart: A Brief Survey of Sound, Noise and their Effects

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to SoundSmart: A Brief Survey of Sound, Noise and their Effects

Similar to SoundSmart: A Brief Survey of Sound, Noise and their Effects (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

SoundSmart: A Brief Survey of Sound, Noise and their Effects