{"word_count": 3023, "character_count": 20974}
by&#160;Grégoire Chelkoff + Eléonore BakDesigning and building space and objects with sound is a stimulating horizon and presents challenges at multiple levels for creative dynamics. These issues are not always understood in the current context and still seem to be highly marginalized. Experiences and attempts to go beyond the stage of a discourse on sounds to create with sounds nevertheless remain a field of action that questions the field of ambiances more globally. Several avenues will be explored through exploratory approaches in this field: architectural sound prototypes, sound planning, sound design, sound objects, creative methods by Grégoire Chelkoff (Ensag /cresson) and Eléonore Bak (Ecole supérieure d’art de Lorraine), involving the physical, sensitive and social dimensions.Translation : ﻿Addressing sound in design andarchitecture, and in the everyday life, has been for us a long journey…Designing space with sounds question both practices, culture, acoustics andtechnique and perception, whether it is about housing, public spaces or largevolumes.In that portion of time today (30 min, thenEleonore), I will mainly talk about what I called architectural soundprototypes as part of a “passive” acoustic approach (that do not use electroacousticmeans).Of course, we could delineate a long experience in that field,punctuated by the precursors before us. We’re not going to do this today… Butwe know the ideas, studies andexperiences that question a portiong of sonic architecture, from Vitruvius,Kircher, Aalto to Leitner, Neumann, Delage, Bašić (experience with the soundsof the sea), Zumthor and many others, for those interested in what soundscould do to space and uses, creation and design…Beyond these, the sonic dimension is not a big interest for the architects and urbanplanners, as it is often studied from the technical point of view, as a nuisance,etc. To revive research and experimentation in that field, we cannot isolatesounds from other factors in architecture. We should isolate less from oneanother. We talk about climate, ambiance. High complexity.Instead, I’m going to explain the way I’ve been working before the “architectural sound prototypes” at thebeginning of the 2000s. Well afterthe sonic “effects” were defined and decided. That’s the idea of the fieldwhere my ideas stem from. My idea is to go towards a practice, a spatial making startingfrom sounds, which involve them in ouruses of space. We have carried out insitu studies, whether they were done in public space, collective housing, underground spaces (ex: Louvres,etc.), gardens… and we also didrecordings and acoustic metrology of architectures and situations (i.e. ofspaces where something happens thatproduces a sonic atmosphere or effect, which I found interesting). Most ofthese situations are available on cartophonies.fr(cf. soundscape)All of our observations, analysis,listening, survey works from the birth of CRESSON in 1979 guided me towards amore “ecological” approach ofdesign: addressing situations depending on theirperception and action conditions, and not just in terms of reception. We don’t have time to discuss that part, butit comes from Gibson, and from someapproaches that lead, in my opinion, to a lessreceptive and representative aesthetics, and more engaging. I will now explain how I arrived to the“architectural sound prototypes”, to what is still driving me. Let’s start fromone thing. Sound is pressure and movement. Movement of sound AND movement ofthe people. Different frequencies – interaction of sound movements with spaces.One of the conditions not to speak about orturn sounds into an object to gaze at is the following:Movement generates perception. The experienced space is a movement, therefore:we will hear throughout space while moving, and as Mikel Dufrennes says:“architecture moves us”, it makes us move, space is movement (Poincaré,Berthoz)My question thus becomes: how to designsound with movement?I then got interested in “systems” perceived on the body scale whilemoving, and not in “soundscapes” ingeneral, studied from a fixed point.Hypothesis that these devices canchange/modify the elements that we can perceive via sounds.The action of “experimenting”, of buildingspatial fragments, “systems” that must be experienced by the moving bodyappeared as a necessity (from one school… That of Grenoble, which reallyhighlighted it in other fields). Our first experiences, carried out withLiveneau, started in 2000, when wetried to develop “forming” principlesof a singular and “ordinary” or extraordinary sonic experience: going alongsidea wall, going through it, leaning in, sitting down, going around, going away,going closer, going up, going down, turning, fitting into a space, etc.Experimenting meant creating a project-scenario, realizing it (problem ofmateriality) and test it out and observing elements… that could lead to anotherexperiment… quite heavy, collective process, not always easy to carry out, butrich in knowledge and lessons.Micro-morphologicalscale. Work on large volumes. To study other scalesof perception.(Whatis a system? Depending on the readings, it is:AsMichel Foucault announced it on the “panoptic”, it is a way to distribute theeye, embodied in the organization of space and, in his example, as part of amonitoring system (prison).However,in architecture the concept of system appears to me in a small essay byWogensky, called “Architecture active” and published in 1972. The readingunveils for me that architecture makes us act, if we give up on his outdatedideas on health, physical milieu, etc. He also talks about simple actions,everyday actions. He thus talks about architecture as made of energy more thanmaterial. Also, there is A. Aalto. Lastly,we have the Le Corbusier’s drawing, representing a partial architectural study(sort of threshold/opening/window), which illustrates to perfection anarchitectural fragment that directs what I could do with him.)To go back to my studied referencesituations (I use “reference situations” instead of “references” like JPPeneau, which gives it an academic aspect), I ended up exploring very localizedsituations that made us perceive an ensemble from a particular angle/aspect andthat our micro-mobilities (“kinesthesis” constituting our relationship to theworld, as Husserl explains) change the sound perception field in a subtle butsignificant way. It is known in acoustics and also known by the user… who intuitively knows about the use ofthings (cf. Gibson)The concept of “device” is stimulating:perceived at body level and with a body, a system provides “holds” or affordances in terms of perception andaction. These considerations question architecture and living systems indetail, and different applications can be found in contemporary situationsinvolving the city and architectures. Thatwasy, I have defined 3 levels of work on the relationship between space,movement and sound: articulations, limits and inclusions.Illustration of a movement that changes thelistening relationship: on the floor or standing, in a garden that is exposedto the sounds of traffic (listening)Definition of the 3 categories:articulations, limits and inclusions depending on the scope of the movementthat generates a change in listening Articulations: depending on the way I move, forms of differentiation – continueas I move.Limits/thresholds: weaker scope of body movement – transfer between two sonicmilieus. The composition changes subtly, but enough to be perceived. The relationshipto the overall environment changes and is transformed. I belong to oneenvironment or the other – we can go in and out of one or another.InclusionsStakes&#160;(examples)Creating sound articulation spaces to consider the differences between “rooms”Rites of passage between worlds of usesRole of these transitions in the memory ofjourneys Example: behind the scenes&#160; Creating limit thresholds that allow to belong to two milieus at the sametime depending on the observer’s positionDual stakes of withdrawal andparticipation: exposure/actionPossibility of choice by the userIn big urban spaces/interior volumes:creating inclusive rooms thatprevent from escaping from a dominating ambiance, concept of interlocking Inclusion:Idea that is more connected to the imagination ofone thing contained in another thing. We are included into a sound envelop, butthis envelop is itself contained in yet another, bigger one. Feeling of beingcaught in that first envelop. Large volumes, housing, urban public spaces.Illustrations of effects in family gardens– compare between a gardener that is standing and that is not. Two recordings –very little difference. But two different levels: ground/head.1st recording: crouching. Now: standing – children are audible.The position of the head in a very smalldifference in “altitude” still changes the perception.Three different effects that can accompanyour perception of space. Different versions of one same space. Ideaof inclusion that doesn’t require a movement – feeling of Russian dolls; theeye doesn’t necessarily work. Formation parametersDistance and nature of walls/listenerMorphology of the envelop contoursAltimeter situations, those are criteria that are meaningful to express myselfand make “passive” sound architectural in the way I intend itIn our experience from 2003, it waspossible to see how affordances (still Gibson, we can talk about opportunitiesfor action, hold, influence, invitation in France) are sensitized, i.e. how weuse, or not, these acoustic abilities for communicative, aesthetic or socialends. This experiment of a bus shelter,double-sided sound system, was carried out. It was interesting to reflect uponsound design and to experiment spatial “systems” that could be included in housingand public space.Inclusion or limit? We tried to show, in asimple way, how we could make aware of the limits/thresholds. Spatialvocabulary – some sounds can be heard.Recording work (tests with people – callsomeone, and see how they interact with that space): footprints wereinteresting to study, variation in depth, distinction between close/far,turning their back to the sound, we can rely and lean on something. The spacewas set to simulate a road environment. Staging of the bus shelter – not realconditions, experimental conditions.From those three elements, I can thinkabout ways to design space to enrich and provide situations to listen andproduce. More studies now, students working on systems (doors, openings),ability to produce relatively explicit localised situations to visualise. We can thus enrich the vocabulary relatedto ambiances.More works on textures and materialities,that could mean something in terms of possibilities of accompanying design withsound (with tools)To think about ordinary situations, weworked on balconies, which are important in housing. A more refined work couldbring about interesting situations in terms of limits/inclusions, with thesounds (local or surrounding). Shorter studies, they don’t always end up infully-fledged forms. Small scale.How can we generate places to communicatewith the inside, but also allow to produce sound, without creating tensionswith neighbours. Usual questions in architecture, but that go beyond when wethink about the way we move. On a bigger scale, we worked on recreatingpaths in wide green spaces, family gardens. Those gardens can create soundsituations.ProductionOur language of design is based onoperative spatial deformations such as&#160;print, deliting, and fold.Each of them calls different potentialitiesof uses, for example :- print generates hollows in the solid andafford to sit in variable depth so that listening to the soundscape or talkingsomeone could&#160; sound quite different. - the little space between different layersof wall (deliting) offers limit situation depending on the angle and thedistance of the ear and the eye, the oscillation of the head while one iswalking according to the slits in the surface may rhythm the listening. - folds generate an envelope which offerssurfaces of reflection near the head and shadow or could afford to lean on.Exploration by students on anopening system that senses a precise signal in a public placeExploration on surfaces withthe rhino, grasshopper toolsApplication on research aboutbalconies, which could be designed based on these articulation, limit andinclusions experiments, to address the relations between inside and outsidespaces.With Esquissons, that we started to use and that is developed by T. MarchalIt is also possible to reflecton urban scales, like in this case, to re-qualify large green spaces andre-colonise the environment by its uses (family gardens, for ex.) to recreateddynamics of crossing paths and possibilities for phonic articulations, such aslimits or thresholds between household and street or “inclusion rooms” thatcreate a localized ambiance.Question 1: This morning, we walked in thegalleries. I’m sure you know this place very well, what can you tell us aboutit in terms of limits/inclusions, etc.?Answer: Yes. Some types of passage.Volumetric differences, the passages allow for transformations, which aresignificant for the place. Either belong to the park, or to the parking lot,etc. I remember this place in particular. Thenarrowing, physically and acoustically, creates a compression, and, at thesound level, articulations (not necessarily the result of an act of thinking).Interesting to study the different types of transitions/articulations, etc.Idea of progression. Studying theexperiment time could be interesting. What would be the elements to think thosespaces?How can we do that?Question 2: In those places ofpermeability, if there is another material approach, is it possible to drawpeople in? Utopia?Answer:&#160;Example of large volumes. Sometimes, long lines. What are theopportunities that these places bring about? (work places: example of Louvre –not possible to get out while working) Interesting to study those spaces interms of the three aspects, inclusion/articulation/limit etc. We shouldn’t maybe study the situations intheir globality. Choice to position oneself according to a specific point ofview. Information desk at the museum: 6s reverberation under the Pyramid. Sonicmass, no hold onto it. Do we tackle the entire volume, or are some partsenough? Different type of work, in terms of the waywe process space. Question 3: What about the galleries?(Lower ones) Linear space – no use but passage. In terms of sound, soundexperiments, could we imagine something?Answer: Often, the opinion we have of aplace depends on the time and the moment in which we observe it. Embryo of usesthat can be interesting.Spatial practice of sound – wecan/should/must experiment.Question 4: Can you talk more about thegardens? Answer: No project. Places that were unused – compared torecordings in gardens. The place exists via its soundscape. An environment’sporosity is interesting (auditory/landscape). There’s nothing else. Sort ofbalance of sounds.Bring back a sonic colour to a place thatno longer has one/doesn’t have one.To make an architectural project possible,we first need to experiment on sensory experiences. Grégoire’s proposition isvery interesting – sensory exploration of gardens as a first step toconstruction/project. Otherwise, how can politicians tackle the idea of sensoryprojects? We need to develop a new culture of projects – based on experiences,and what we deduce from experiences. Urbanistic debates that can be strong attimes. Reflections on sounds can question work habits and sometimes reluctantpatterns on spatial porosity. It sometimes requires proper criteria tounderstand the relevance.Sound in itself has a value. We tend toevacuate the sonic dimension, but it can be interesting and educational -&#160; BUT it’s not trendy for now, which is why Isaid we had a long way to go.Question 5: How do we integrate thequestion of representations and references in situations?Answer: valid for every situation. Debateshere can be interesting with interlocutors. We can’t know beforehand how peoplewill think. Why closing such space if it can be useful? In a concrete way, whatis the displacement that we propose? System of power plays. Debate. It implies a new way of designingprojects – inclusion of discussion. Evaluation of agreement/limit/compromisesthat can satisfy everyone (if possible)Question of limits. Propositions,discussions, debates. Different positions and points of view. We don’t hide onepoint of view, we maybe modulate it.Remark: Time is an important factor to takeinto account. Turns between the way people appropriate the space. In themorning, specific public. At lunchtime, other public. Later, other one. But if the space is appropriated by one public at all times, that can create conflicts. Important spaces can beintervened upon, but there will always be unhappy people: make propositions,but offer alternatives/ways to modulate.Margin for the users.We can impose one sonic climate. Importantto apply that to very small scales, instead of a macro-thinking. (even if thatcan be criticised, too)Idea of adaptable/regulation/no-dominance.Many things are yet to be done/still to be done.Question 6: What about Place de la République in Paris?Answer:Doesn’t know that space well enough. Idea of unlimited, neutral space. Work onlarge spaces (Défense in Paris)Talking topeople that know the space very well: they go out to eat for lunch and try tofind corners to withdraw from the ambiance (even if a little). Small distancefrom the work space, in which we are constantly immerged, day after day. Onlyspace where we feel like we can escape from the bigger environment.The usesthat are born here are set up in their own way. Some people are disturbed bysome uses sometimes. Co-existence. Russian dolls.Interestingdifferences in terms of urban life.Remark 7: Médiathèque desHalles (Paris). Thelibrary is there, it’s possible to go out, drink, play, dance. We can be in a“library” ambiance with a book, then go to the café. Many places in one space. We can withdraw while keepingcontact/maintaining the same activity. No exclusion. Inclusion instead.Question 8:Concept of Schizophonia. In terms of design, are there limits connected to thatconcept? Very little sources. Answer:Fracture in terms of semantics. Interpretations of sound perceptions.Divisions. We often use it when the sound is broken. Depends on the context –careful. Cf. Schaffer (100 exercises on sound and experiences) – first tosuggest ways to open the practice. Dark side of Schaffer (culturalism): before,we listened to live music, and now we listen to it after recording. Fracturefrom the actual experience.Idea ofacousmatic (Acousmatic&#160;music (from Greek ἄκουσμα akousma, "a thing heard") is a form of electroacoustic musicthat is specifically composed for presentation using speakers, as opposed to alive performance.) First, we listen, and the rest is discarded for the timebeing.How canbring together different perceptions? Question of projects/culture of projects.Common experience, realization that we have different perceptions, and thatenriches the project. Architectural, artistic angles. We should diversify theapproaches on the same public.Hard tomake disciplines meet, which seem to want to own their knowledge. Day-to-daydesign. Lots ofwork to do.Question 9:Promenadology? Way to appropriate a place, how do you do this, specificpractices?Answer:Terms that gather together everything. We can use it to analyse, then todesign. Promenadology is a way to see opportunities + questioning micro-events.How can we transform spaces that seem to create weariness a priori? Russiandolls effect. One space in one space in one space. It already exists, but weare not aware of it, because we weakened our sensitivities. We need to rebuildexperiences to re-train our senses. Most people cannot recognize that it’sgoing to rain anymore, they don’t feel if they’re too warm or too cold. How canwe create systems that make us conscious, with another logic of “promenade”,including in a sitting position?Conditioningthat evacuates actions, uses that we are not used to anymore. Importance ofeducation to make us more sensitive again. Enrich our experiences again.We don’tneed a specific method. G.C. likes to trigger experiences. Here is an angle,I’m going to test it in different ways. That’s how you test a place. Repetitionof an experience time and again. Createvariations, it’s a way to know an object (for example). Reiterations andrepetitions. What if…? What if…? What if…? Way to vary the subject of study togain a way to apprehend it. Infinite.Varyingexperience conditions is extremely important. Scope in terms of perceptions. A“sliver” of methods. Provoking/triggering events is interesting.Withoutvariations, what can I say?Historically,many tools were created/implemented. Some come from our field, others come fromothers.Each method has its virtues and its limits.Translation by Sophie Provost 