Intentional | Audio Identity Blog

If you’re stateside, you’ve likely heard about the lost whales that veered off course for a Sacramento pit stop before turning around and making it back to the home they call The Pacific. Now that we have our happy ending, curious minds may wonder why does this happen?

The Modesto Bee looked into it:

While some have wondered whether noise drove these two whales inland, experts say they consider it highly unlikely. Yet with sonar linked to beached whales from the Canary Islands to the Bahamas, questions linger about how much we’re disrupting the seas…

Noise levels in the Pacific have been going up about three decibels a decade for 40 years, largely because of shipping, Hildebrand said. It’s safe to assume the background noise was at least 20 decibels lower before modern shipping, he said…

Tens of thousands of species whose hearing we understand poorly have had to adjust, if they can.

It is known that porpoises, dolphins, and the rest of the roughly 80 species lumped together as whales rely on sound because it travels better underwater than light. Many smaller whales make their own sonar, uttering dozens or hundreds of clicks per second and analyzing the returning sound to map what’s ahead, a process called echolocation.

In February I pointed to a similar story about the planet’s soundscapes and their increasing congestion, and this follows a similar line: just like crowded spaces, crowded soundscapes produce real problems. How severe a problem, we’re not yet sure:

While suspicions about noise’s ill effects have been around for at least 30 years, humans are only beginning to grasp how much they’re blundering into this sound-rich world.

When David Mellinger, an Oregon State University specialist in whale acoustics, put underwater microphones deep in the mid-Atlantic, he was startled to find almost constant noise from distant oil and gas exploration, with seismic air guns shot off every 20 seconds to analyze the seabed in search of oil and gas deposits…Air guns, Mellinger and others say, are probably the second largest source of human ocean noise, second to shipping.

This certainly raises some interesting issues with respect to modulation, control and species survival, with my first three questions being somewhat obvious: can, how and should we tone it down?

I’ve lifted liberally from the article to give you the juicier snippets, but the full article’s worth the 3 minutes it takes to read it. Enjoy.

– Noel Franus

Finally, someone’s figured out the sound of spam. Just what you were hoping for on a Monday morning.

“Writing about music is like dancing about architecture,” or so it’s been said. And I’ve been doing more than my fair share of this over at the day job. So let’s take a break from the semi-heady stuff and get down to some ear-bending goodness:

• Fast Company’s The Sound of Brands slideshow provides a sample of short-form audio logos. (Thanks Stephen.)
• The Association of International Glaucoma Societies’ Glaucoma Hymn is great gambling material: I’ll bet you a dollar you can’t listen to the whole thing through.
• Ernst & Young’s corporate anthem is a classic. (No more wondering where American Idol rejects go once they’re booted from the audition.)

• KPMG has something to tell you — no doubt, it’s straight from the heart. Grab a tissue.

And last but not least, the ultimate in corporate anthems from our pals Devo.

Happy weekend…

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: audio branding is “the intentional use of music, sound, voice and silence to create a connection between people and organizations.” It’s my stock definition.

Oddly, one of those words never fully resonates with me (and I suspect with others), no matter how often I say it: music, sound, voice…and…silence. Like the runt of the litter, silence usually takes a backseat to its bigger, splashier, sexier siblings.

Visual design has “make the logo bigger;” audio has “more cowbell.” Visual design goes bold, italic, beveled. Audio goes to eleven. And silence…well, silence sits there nicely with its mouth closed.

But there’s more to silence than that. I was reminded of that recently when I came across a WSJ.com writeup of John Cage’s 4′33″ — a revolutionary four minutes and thirty-three seconds of “performance silence.” And I think it’s worth sharing, at least in part. Peter Gutman writes:

4′33″ is often described as a “silent” piece, but it isn’t at all. It’s true that no music comes from the stage as concertgoers expect, but there’s plenty of sound, albeit from unconventional sources. The audience soon becomes aware of immersion in a universe of audio sensation from the mundane to the profound — shifting in seats, air conditioning, passing traffic, one’s own heartbeat. Associations arise. Memories flow. 4′33″ is deeply personal, as no two people will ever experience it the same way.

Obligatory YouTube video:

Spellbinding. And frustrating as well. While I’m tempted to call BS on that video and on the entire performance (talk about white space, that was an entire white mural), it’s important to remember that this is not about what the performance is as much as what it does. And what it does is force you to think in new ways about silence as a concept, rather than a lack of sound.

Ambient, harmonic sounds created by the water, serving as an aural placemarker for visitors.

In the right hands, this could create positive, long-lasting mental associations: those sounds = that place. In the wrong hands, with the wrong tones, this could drive many people batty. (Hmm, I sense a sociological experiment is imminent…)