In the "Evening Standard" a few days ago was an
article about the coming shows in Hyde Park which were claimed to have state of
the art facilities of the 21st Century.
One was that the sound in performance would mean that it would be
impossible to hear the person next to you speak.
This could seem to be an advantage in the case of having
one of those chatty people who simply cannot shut up who might be next to
you. What is does mean is that both the
decibel sound level and the mix of frequencies etc. are designed to have a huge
impact.
In my own locality, some venue owners who have been told
to limit their sound output have complained that it is akin to a human right to
decide your own sound level and effects and that performance is impossible
without this. What happens to others is
none of their business but the Council's problem.
A contact of mine took exception to this and mailed the
local council and copied it to me for interest.
this blog has mentioned hearing issues in the past.
Quote:
For the attention of the Chief Executive, the Legal and
other relevant Departments.
Reference to reports in the local media about Noise
Abatement and the protests of some venue owners concerning orders issued
relating to the control of sound levels.
To suggest that they "fall silent" is both inaccurate and
misleading.
I have been to very many performances of live music in
various places, none of which were amplified, but which were far from
silent. The problem is not performance,
it is the nature of the very high levels of amplification used in some forms of
music.
The Council is to be congratulated on taking into account
the potential consequences for others in attempting to limit the extent and
effects of high decibel and other levels of sound in the vicinity of these
venues.
What is clear is that many people, including those
wishing to provide high sound events have little or no understanding of what is
involved and the responsibilities entailed.
There is ample information available from organisations that deal with
hearing loss of the very real risks entailed in exposure to excessive sound
that high levels of decibels can result in permanent damage sometimes to the
extent of real disability and handicap.
To suggest that venue owners can be at liberty to ramp up the sound to well
above danger levels not only to those present but also to others in the
vicinity who are at risk is not simply foolish it is asking for trouble.
Because research into the effects of sound has benefited
from the progress in science and capability in recent years the questions
arising go beyond that of simple direct sound and the potential and risk of
damage to hearing. One notable field is
that of neurology where recent scanning and related techniques have transformed
both knowledge and understanding.
One aspect of this is that the loss of hearing is not
confined to the ear drums but connects to the parts of the brain related to
this. This has long term effects on both
behaviour and function. Necessarily,
where a person may already have any condition or potential, notably for
aneurysms, then the excessive sound will materially increase the risk. Also
people with particular other forms of cardiac or neural issues can be
affected adversely.
But sound is not something essentially "ethereal"
it is also a physical entity to which the laws of physics apply. To put it crudely high persistent sound
levels are said to induce a "high".
This is in fact concussion to one degree or another. An effect of concussion is a disassociation
and often loss of control. Too much
concussion too often can lead to permanent brain damage, as in boxing or other
violent sports.
In the period before health and safety regulation severe deafness
and behaviour issues were notorious in many trades and works. Also, many people were made vulnerable
because of medical issues that affected the hearing and potential for damage,
for example, infections either not diagnosed or treated late.
Beyond the human effects there are the potential effects
on the actual venue building and others in the immediate vicinity. This takes us into the physics of Collapse
Dynamics a relatively new field of study although related to long known aspects
of structures and geophysics. Loud sound
creates physical tremors which can move through earth and buildings.
The effects are difficult to predict because of the
necessary complexity. However, recently
the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, one of the more solid buildings of a
past age, cancelled an amplified performance because of the potential
structural risks.
If there are a number of venues each creating through the
amplification systems varying and sometimes intensive bursts of sound and
tremors over a long period of time then it would be difficult to predict, but
it would be wise to assume that potential cost can arise. Where then the liability might fall is a
legal question for which expert advice is necessary.
Sadly, I suspect that those who believe that performance
is impossible without high levels of amplification will not be persuaded and
will not care about the risks and costs not only to those who take part but
others who have the misfortune to be nearby.
Unquote.
What he failed to mentions was
that these days among the young whose hearing mostly should be good and for
whom treatments for infections or other natural hearing loss are available,
very many are slowly and certainly losing their hearing without realising it.
Nor being aware of the long
term consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment