[HN Gopher] Sound-suppressing silk can create quiet spaces
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Sound-suppressing silk can create quiet spaces
        
       Author : geox
       Score  : 248 points
       Date   : 2024-05-07 20:23 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (news.mit.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (news.mit.edu)
        
       | iamkonstantin wrote:
       | I would love to have something like this. Even better if it comes
       | in a portable form for the occasional visit to the office.
        
         | Terr_ wrote:
         | I'm chuckling imagining a bunch of office-workers walking
         | around with anachronistic silk head-veils and wimples.
        
           | BizarroLand wrote:
           | And CEOs with $18,000 egg chairs lined with this.
        
         | Klaster_1 wrote:
         | Second this, I totally can imagine buying a bead or windows
         | curtain made out of material so I won't have to use ear plugs
         | every night to stop hearing dog barks.
        
         | oulipo wrote:
         | Or for snoring reduction
        
       | shmageggy wrote:
       | Judging by the figures in the paper, it appears to attenuate low
       | frequencies better than high frequencies, which is perhaps to be
       | expected judging by experience with noise-cancelling headphones.
       | This could be a game-changing complement to traditional acoustic
       | treatment for recording studios and other acoustic spaces, where
       | low frequencies are traditionally much harder to treat, requiring
       | much larger and more expensive panels.
        
         | whydid wrote:
         | I'm a mix/master engineer, and I just skimmed the paper to look
         | for attenuation potential of this new material. It looks like
         | they only tested above 100 HZ, which is still alright for
         | conversation, but not for professional recording studios.
         | 
         | As you can imagine, the low frequency attenuation isn't great.
         | But the performance of higher frequency attenuation is pretty
         | good. I think this material would work well for meeting rooms,
         | and perhaps restaurants. Not for recording studios.
        
           | aldanor wrote:
           | Use this silk material as a cover for bass traps? Win-win
        
         | Wohlf wrote:
         | Low frequencies travel further, in my house high frequency road
         | noise is annoying but tends to come and go quickly but low
         | frequency road noise I can often hear from literally miles
         | away.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | "Farther" not just in a straight line but also around corners
           | and through structures.
        
       | greenhearth wrote:
       | I would buy a carpet made of this to not hear the downstairs
       | people.
        
         | rendall wrote:
         | Your downstairs neighbors would probably also appreciate it!
        
       | nwellinghoff wrote:
       | Can't get to market fast enough. They are absolutely right that
       | applying this technology to silencing noise it sorely needed.
        
       | mixedbit wrote:
       | I would love if advances in material technologies would allow to
       | design a window glass-like material that would let outside air
       | in, but would cancel exterior sounds.
        
         | ghusbands wrote:
         | I have seen such a thing in an article, though I don't know how
         | to find it. It was a window with a square grid of circular
         | holes in it - air could flow through, but sound waves were
         | dissipated.
        
           | dest wrote:
           | This maybe https://www.ntu.edu.sg/eee/news-
           | events/news/detail/-noise-ca...
        
             | ghusbands wrote:
             | That's active electronic noise cancellation - there have
             | been many of those described and very few delivered over
             | the past thirty years. Presumably because it's the sort of
             | thing that is angle-sensitive and hard to set up and
             | maintain.
             | 
             | The thing I saw was just a pane of glass or plastic with
             | large round holes in it to attenuate/dissipate sound waves
             | while allowing significant airflow.
        
         | BHSPitMonkey wrote:
         | That would be nice. The next best thing is probably a regular
         | (shut) window with an ERV/HRV somewhere.
        
           | thfuran wrote:
           | Isn't that just better all around? Though a regular shut
           | window isn't actually all that good at blocking sound.
        
       | squarefoot wrote:
       | I'd be curious to know how would it damp lower frequencies that
       | travel also by contact. Sound proofing for mid-high frequencies
       | is easy if one doesn't aim at studio quality: just use wood and
       | foam panels, break facing walls and angles with acoustic
       | absorbing objects and cover every window or mirror (read: glass)
       | with a thick curtain, add carpets on the floor and panels on the
       | ceiling, and you're done. (hint: a $5 foam panel glued on a thin
       | OSB board makes a quite effective, still light and cheap
       | absorbing panel for mid-high frequencies) However, bass
       | frequencies will be only marginally affected by that, and
       | depending on what the room is used for, the above treatment might
       | turn out as insufficient: probably overkill for recording a
       | podcast, still not enough for recording music at higher volumes
       | like when miking a band. Treatments for lower frequencies are
       | expensive because of the necessity to literally prevent walls,
       | floor and ceiling from vibrating, which invariably requires them
       | to be weighed down adding concrete layers to further lower down
       | their resonance frequency, before adding soundproofing. Sometimes
       | the best approach is to build a drywall room into the room, which
       | of course is more expensive and space constraining than the
       | wood+foam panels solution.
        
         | Tom3849 wrote:
         | Active noise cancellation speakers. You can create small quiet
         | bubble for your head, where you sleep.
        
         | michaelbuckbee wrote:
         | You mentioned building drywall room - a neat building technique
         | I only learned about recently that's along these lines (but a
         | huge space and cost savings) is a "staggered stud" wall.
         | 
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/Carpentry/comments/13j7o4u/staggere...
        
         | johnvanommen wrote:
         | The silk sheet from the article is a loudspeaker.
         | 
         | The solution proposed in the article requires a microphone, and
         | would have a tough time dealing with multiple sources.
         | 
         | It basically records the room, then plays the room back via the
         | silk sheet, but out-of-phase. Because it's out of phase, it
         | cancels out.
        
       | TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
       | Another thing textiles can do is block wind:
       | https://research.chalmers.se/en/publication/534412
        
       | sheepenumerator wrote:
       | This is interesting! As someone who often struggles with noise
       | from my environment, I'd love to have something like a mosquito
       | net that can be put around my bed to keep the noise out.
        
       | xlii wrote:
       | Having sound sensitivity I'll buy this the moment it comes out.
       | 
       | I've lost countless nights of sleep only because neighbors behind
       | the walls had normal meet conversations past 12am. I really try
       | to not be PITA but it's my wellbeing vs theirs in the end. It's a
       | rental apartment so some are sympathetic and some are not.
       | 
       | In case you wonder why not ear plugs could help: they don't work
       | because I can hear my blood flow and heart beat and it's even
       | worse.
        
         | reportgunner wrote:
         | You think this curtain will help ? Article says it vibrates
         | when it's working so that will probably disturb you as well.
        
           | thfuran wrote:
           | How so?
        
           | Reubachi wrote:
           | It's give and take, it will help more than bare hard wall.
           | 
           | Heavy curtains are the cheapest/easiest way to "sound deaden"
           | a normal room. Their fabric surface area is greater than the
           | bare wall, and the weight helps isolate vibration. Thinner
           | ones will be less effective. Never effective as foam, and no
           | method is as effective as actual mechanical isolation (IE a
           | room suspended in a room)
        
         | taraparo wrote:
         | Try Mack's silicon earplugs. they are not to be placed inside
         | the ear canal but only to cover the entrance from the outside.
         | so no unpleasant pressure, no heart beating etc. using them for
         | years.
        
         | amlib wrote:
         | The best solution for these cases of mild inconvenient noise is
         | to mask it with more noise, ideally a fan or a pink/brown noise
         | generator, or even sounds of rain or a waterfall.
         | 
         | You want the noise to be indistinct enough that your mind won't
         | focus on it. So avoid a bad fan that has a whiny pitch, that
         | will drive you crazy.
        
         | drginducedlyric wrote:
         | Just be happy you don't live below someone who stomps around
         | their apartment all day and night. The deep thud of heel strike
         | vibrates your body and because it's very fast attack/low
         | frequency noise, it's very hard to block the sound itself. Ear
         | plugs do nothing. It's like living inside of a drum.
        
         | driverdan wrote:
         | Have you looked into the current solutions? MLV sound barriers
         | such as curtains, for example, can help with this.
        
       | oulipo wrote:
       | This could be great to remove snoring noise for couples, instant
       | seller haha
        
         | johnvanommen wrote:
         | It's kinda surprising that nobody has made a product for that,
         | because it COULD be done with a plain ol' loudspeaker playing
         | out of phase.
         | 
         | Basically:
         | 
         | 1) put a mic above one person's head, in the headboard or
         | somewhere near there
         | 
         | 2) record the room
         | 
         | 3) play the room back from the same location, but out of phase
         | 
         | voila! Snoring cancellation.
         | 
         | One unfortunate side effect is that it might be quite loud for
         | other people in the home! Because the cancellation will only
         | work well at a single point in space; get a few feet away and
         | it will sound like TWO people snoring. (The snorer, and the
         | loudspeaker.)
        
       | jstummbillig wrote:
       | I really, really hope the space of acoustic room treatment is
       | incredibly inefficient and somebody can 10x a solution at some
       | point. There is a lot of good that could be done by establishing
       | acoustic treatment and managing noise (transmission) as a
       | requirement for any type of indoor and outdoor construction.
        
         | logtempo wrote:
         | the problem in buildings is the building transmitting
         | vibrations. That's why it's hard to find a solution afterward.
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | Indeed.
           | 
           | Anecdotal example: I'm currently living above a cafe, with an
           | entire floor (with an office in it) between us and them.
           | 
           | When they drag the tables and chairs around, we can hear it
           | easily, because it sets up a vibration through the structure
           | of the building. Took us a long time to realise where the
           | noise came from -- it _sounds like_ it comes from above, but
           | the flat above us has been unoccupied on some of the
           | occasions we heard the noise, and we were only able to
           | confirm the real origin by me being outside the cafe watching
           | them while my partner was inside, and with the two of us on a
           | call so we could directly observe that what the cafe staff
           | were doing correlated with the noises he was hearing.
        
           | prox wrote:
           | Is this a "we didn't consider it" problem, or a "it's part of
           | how we build these days" problem?
        
             | jstummbillig wrote:
             | Both, increasingly the later, in a mix of cost (and who
             | shoulders it and when), regulation and in how far we design
             | around our shortcomings.
             | 
             | For example, a window is a very obvious thing. Obvious
             | things, we value. A balcony. A garden. These things either
             | exist in some capacity or they do not, and it's easily to
             | mentally check them.
             | 
             | Acoustic treatment is more akin to differences in heat
             | insulation. You notice it, when it's a problem, at best. Or
             | it's a problem that you pay for all the time, but you don't
             | even know how much. If buyers/renters don't value something
             | directly, even if it impacts the negatively, the incentives
             | on the builders end to spent on it are understandably low.
             | It requires regulation to be done properly (which a lot of
             | countries have understood and, hence, regulated).
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | It got real expensive here to build multifamily housing in
           | part because you have to put acoustic separation in shared
           | walls now. That and a tight construction market are putting
           | the brakes on what would otherwise be unwise levels of
           | growth. And therefore unlikely to change except by accident.
        
         | atoav wrote:
         | As someone who teaches an introductory course on acoustics and
         | the nature of sound I have to say that I can't see how that
         | would work.
         | 
         | The main problem is that acoustics are affected by everything
         | within a room because sound from humans and most loudspeakers
         | spreads in a somewhat special fashion. So your acoustics
         | problem is usually:
         | 
         | 1. Sound goes everywhere and it is not directed just to the
         | places where ears are. This way the sound waves of me speaking
         | also hits the ceiling in a million places and these reflected
         | signals come at you with varying time delay and mix with the
         | direct signal of my voice. If the surfaces of the room are
         | hard, you will have those sounds bouncing around till they
         | loose energy.
         | 
         | 2. On top of that every room has particular frequencies that it
         | resonates with to create resonances that make that specific
         | frequency ring longer or the room seems to suck the energy out
         | of that frequency. These are called the mosal frequencies of
         | the room.
         | 
         | One remedy to 1 is to make big chunks room surfaces absorptive
         | or to put more stuff into the room that scatters the souns
         | waves earlier. So: carpets, special ceilings, curtains,
         | acoustic panels or foam at the walls, etc. Tirns out human
         | flesh is also quite good ar this, so packing the room with
         | people also helps.
         | 
         | Another way to deal with 1 (if you can't touch the
         | architecture) is to emit souns in a very directed manner only
         | to where ears are. Nut that means microphones, a mixer, 5kEUR
         | per piece beamforming loudspeakers + personal with enough
         | acoustic knowledge to place them in the right spot and steer
         | the beam in the right way etc.
         | 
         | The room mode thing is almost luxury to treat by that point,
         | but it typically involves changing the room geometry, and
         | building buying specially tuned absorbers that are tuned and
         | measured within the room. Depending on how low you want to go
         | with the frequency of your acoustic treatment these absorbers
         | become big fast and can take a third of the space in a room.
         | 
         | In my experience the main problem is that people building rooms
         | treat acoustics as some afterthought, something expensive that
         | you need to avoid to save money. In fact the planing stage is
         | the _cheapest_ place to improve acoustics. You could for
         | example not decide to make a conference room with pure concrete
         | walls /ceiling and a tiled floor, because any person should be
         | able ro imagine the acoustics of that room.
         | 
         | I had to work in a newly gallery space that had worse acoustics
         | than a church. When I asked the architect about the acoustics
         | and why the delay times don't fit the purpose, the architect
         | said for money reasons they ordered "a better looking car
         | deck". The acoustic treatment of that space will cost way more
         | than if they just hadn't decided on a barren ceiling and pure
         | concrete walls.
         | 
         | The same points go for insulation between rooms. There is no
         | magic here, just physics. If you want insulation you have to
         | put mass between rooms and decouple/dampen their interactions.
         | You either do that from the start by building things correctly
         | or you do that afterwards by building another floating room in
         | your existing room. In both cases you have to inspect
         | painstakingly for acoustic bridges, sometimes a single nail
         | touching the outer wall in the wrong way already bridges enough
         | sound to make it noticable.
         | 
         | We know how to build good sounding and well insulated spaces.
         | People just don't want to pay for it. We know how to reproduce
         | speech in acoustically horrible places, people just don't want
         | to pay for it. Acoustics is perceived as an abstract, high-
         | brow, fancy classical-music-topic. That is, until people
         | perceive how straining bad acoustics can be, then they want
         | sudden magic solutions.
        
           | rapjr9 wrote:
           | Perhaps two sheets of material, one that acts as a high
           | resolution two dimensional microphone array, the other that
           | acts as a high resolution two dimensional speaker array with
           | the microphone array a fixed distance from the speaker array.
           | The microphone array detects sounds, the distance between
           | sheets equals the processing delay as it relates to the speed
           | of sound, and the speaker array cancels the wavefronts. Maybe
           | two layers of microphone arrays would be needed to estimate
           | the angle of arrival of the sound pressure fronts. That
           | wouldn't help the problem of sound that travels through
           | walls, ceiling and floor to the other half of the room (or to
           | a different room). You'd need sound cancelers in front of or
           | behind every room surface in every direction, and bass
           | traveling through a floor seems difficult to stop since it
           | would require a lot of energy. Still, a vibration isolated
           | bed with these magic sound canceling sheets surrounding it
           | might be fairly effective. Letting the sound of smoke alarms,
           | air raid sirens, police sirens, etc. through in emergencies
           | could be an issue. Sounds expensive using today's technology
           | though, one sheet might require a fair amount of computer
           | processing for say a 10,000 x 10,000 array of microphones and
           | the same size speaker array. Starting with proper sound
           | isolating construction might be cheaper. Though if mass
           | produced the cost may eventually go down a lot. It doesn't
           | necessarily have to solve all sound problems, just the ones
           | some people find annoying. Perfect silence is in fact fairly
           | spooky and freaks some people out (if you've ever been in an
           | anechoic chamber).
        
         | JamesSwift wrote:
         | The massive additional cost to construction is likely what
         | holds it back. If you've ever looked into soundproofing, its a
         | deep rabbit hole that basically boils down to you have to
         | physically isolate all the physical materials that could
         | transmit noise. So basically you have an inner-room built inset
         | from an outer-room shell with noise dampening attachments at
         | all the points they meet.
        
           | ineedaj0b wrote:
           | the cheapest way when I worked construction was doubling the
           | drywall. Put up two sheets instead of one on all walls.
           | Typical insulation in the walls was fine but double sheeting
           | led to a significant reduction.
        
         | dissuade wrote:
         | Cars. Cars are the problem.
         | 
         | Don't make buildings cost more. Stop the noise.
         | 
         | At the very least, you take a muffler off your Harley, you get
         | your Harley taken away.
         | 
         | Jail.
         | 
         | Consequences for antisocial behavior.
         | 
         | Taking the most expensive fiber in the world and then adding
         | gizmos to it is the wrong way
        
           | balfirevic wrote:
           | I don't care about cars (I'm sure they are a problem for
           | many, but not in my particular street). I do care that I
           | can't sing and play instruments late at night.
        
           | alexose wrote:
           | > At the very least, you take a muffler off your Harley, you
           | get your Harley taken away.
           | 
           | This is one problem that I think is eminently solvable.
           | Virtually _nobody_ wants these vehicles in their community.
           | 
           | The reason the problem persists is because they disappear out
           | of sight and without evidence before anyone can do anything
           | about it. Just as soon as they annoy everyone, they're gone.
           | 
           | (And let's be honest, the police aren't particularly
           | incentivized to pull these people over, given that they're
           | almost by definition selfish assholes who are difficult to
           | deal with.)
           | 
           | One solution I've been daydreaming of is a device that could
           | cheaply and reliably capture video of passing vehicles
           | (detailed enough to read license plates) and assign a
           | loudness rating. The loudest vehicles could be shared to a
           | database, and the data made freely available to whatever
           | agencies are responsible for issuing tickets.
           | 
           | I suspect that with a large enough body of a evidence, the
           | existing laws become much easier to enforce.
        
             | dissuade wrote:
             | the police are the same people or at least the same kind of
             | antisocial
        
       | konschubert wrote:
       | I bet you that they wanted to do the nose cancelling method and
       | then discovered they applying a static voltage worked much
       | better.
       | 
       | I am still bit sure how well it really works.
        
         | thfuran wrote:
         | I don't think applying a static voltage would do much. But as
         | to how well it works,
         | 
         | > In vibration-mediated suppression mode, the fabric could
         | reduce sound transmission up to 75 percent.
         | 
         | So about 6 dB reduction.
        
           | konschubert wrote:
           | Thanks For pointing out that number. I didn't see that
           | somehow.
           | 
           | I was referring to this:
           | 
           | > In the other, more surprising technique, the fabric is held
           | still to suppress vibrations that are key to the transmission
           | of sound. This prevents noise from being transmitted through
           | the fabric and quiets the volume beyond. This second approach
           | allows for noise reduction in much larger spaces like rooms
           | or cars.
        
             | thfuran wrote:
             | Yeah, but I don't think that can be achieved by applying a
             | static voltage. I think it'd operate pretty similarly to
             | regular nose cancelling where it requires a dynamic signal,
             | but the goal to is keep the fabric stationary rather than
             | to produce a vibration that negates some incident sound at
             | some position. Although maybe that really is as easy as
             | hooking the piezo fibers up to a low-impedance constant
             | voltage source?
        
       | AltruisticGapHN wrote:
       | A quieter world would be life changing. It's incredible how low
       | tech we are in regard to sound.
        
         | piva00 wrote:
         | From my own experience, it is life changing.
         | 
         | I grew up in Sao Paulo, Brazil, an extremely noisy city mostly
         | due to traffic: old vehicles, motorbikes with open exhausts,
         | cars honking, noisy trucks passing by residential
         | neighbourhoods, an airport inside the city (with take-off and
         | landing ramps over major residential neighbourhoods, including
         | one I lived at), etc.
         | 
         | Moved to Sweden more than a decade ago and lived in very quiet
         | places here, nowadays right in front of a forest with a couple
         | of lakes nearby, and I simply cannot spend more than a few
         | weeks back in Sao Paulo after getting used to the quietness. I
         | feel much, much more stressed just existing there, even inside
         | apartments on the 20th floor, even on the "quieter" parts of
         | the city, it's a physical feeling that I do not shake off until
         | I'm back home in Sweden.
         | 
         | One can get "used" to noisy environments but the difference it
         | is to live in quieter areas is really hard to describe, I don't
         | think I can tolerate living in noisy environments after seeing
         | how life is on the other end of the spectrum...
        
           | soneca wrote:
           | I live in Sao Paulo and I noticed that contrast when I
           | visited the central area of Kopenhagen. It was impressive and
           | delightful how quiet that neighborhood (without cars) is.
           | 
           | Of course I still can tolerate the noise, since I still live
           | here. I am used to it and, most of the times, I don't
           | consciously care. But I do appreciate and miss the quietness.
        
           | throwaway13337 wrote:
           | I had a similar experience when I moved to a very rural house
           | for a couple of years. It was extremely comfortable.
           | 
           | Whenever I got back to the city, I felt overwhelmed.
           | 
           | I ended up living in the city and getting used to the noise
           | again. I made the conscious decision to do so because I felt
           | like I limited myself a lot in the places that were
           | acceptable.
           | 
           | Comfort is it's own prison.
           | 
           | I wonder, though, if there is some kind of gain I miss out on
           | by getting used to discomfort.
        
           | pja wrote:
           | The introduction of electric vehicles has made Spanish cities
           | much quieter. The youth can hurtle around on their electric
           | bikes / scooters in the wee hours without waking everyone up
           | for miles around!
        
             | onemoresoop wrote:
             | In NY electric bikes haven't made much of a dent in sound
             | pollution, there are still fat slobs on their Harley's
             | disturbing blocks and blocks of residents either at night
             | or during the day. Hoping I can drape this silk over my
             | ears or something...
        
           | nox101 wrote:
           | Interesting? I don't generally find forest to be quiet. The
           | cricket noises, shuffling leaves, etc keep me up. Of course
           | city noises keep me up to but suburbs are often quiet
        
             | flawsofar wrote:
             | suburbs are the worst.
             | 
             | Natural noises have a rhythm that doesn't stress us out and
             | wake us. Methodical.
             | 
             | A busy road can mostly start to blend into white noise.
             | Unless it's absolute sociopaths honking in residential
             | neighborhoods.
             | 
             | Suburbs though have leaf blowers that your asshole neighbor
             | uses 2 hours before it's legal to use it.
             | 
             | That noise is inconsistent, and it is the worst sound. Some
             | people just suck though.
        
               | sandworm101 wrote:
               | >> Natural noises have a rhythm that doesn't stress us
               | out and wake us.
               | 
               | Florida. Key West. Protected bird species. The parking
               | lot roosters. Nothing methodical about them.
        
             | piva00 wrote:
             | I don't enjoy absolute silence at all, quietness for me is
             | low intensity natural background noise. Shuffling of
             | leaves, birds, crickets, wind through trees' canopy, a
             | stream of water, all of that is very much soothing (and
             | wanted) noise for me.
             | 
             | I've been around a few suburbs in the USA and they aren't
             | quiet to my ears, they sound dead for a lack of a better
             | word. Dead with the odd noise from a car's engine and tyres
             | (usually a pickup truck), lawn mower, leaf blower rushing
             | through it.
             | 
             | Absolute silence is not even natural, it gives me the
             | creeps when I'm in a deafening silent ambient.
        
             | nayuki wrote:
             | Suburbs are bad in terms of noise. The biggest sources of
             | noise I heard were (gas-powered) lawnmowers, the weekly
             | garbage trucks, snow plows, car traffic, and air
             | conditioners.
        
               | throwway120385 wrote:
               | For me it's leaf blowers. For years there was a lawn crew
               | that would run a leafblower outside during a regular
               | conference call I had and I would have to stop what I was
               | saying while the guy went by a quarter mile away from me.
        
           | balder1991 wrote:
           | I also grew up in a Brazilian capital and during vacations
           | I'd go to my grandma's place in a farm about 2km away from a
           | small city in the countryside.
           | 
           | Even to this day, one of my best memory of that place is the
           | quietness I could experience by sitting at wheeling chair in
           | the front of the house and the only sound you'd hear would be
           | the wind, birds and sometimes chickens nearby.
           | 
           | Nowadays it isn't the same sadly, because the city grew
           | enough turn the road at the front much more busy. Now there's
           | a motorbike or truck passing by every 2 minutes, which spoils
           | the whole experience.
        
           | faceplanted wrote:
           | You seem to think the issue is noise, but have you considered
           | noise might just be the most noticeable symptom of general
           | city living? i.e. having much less personal space, nature,
           | privacy, and free time to spend in them?
        
             | geodel wrote:
             | Ok, so what are those place where one have lot of personal
             | space, nature , privacy and free time but very noisy all
             | the time.
        
             | piva00 wrote:
             | I had a great time living in cities, and still miss it.
             | It's not an objective choice, depends absolutely on your
             | preferences and lifestyle if city living is worth it or
             | not.
             | 
             | Having less personal space, privacy, nature, etc. are
             | trade-offs for what a city provides if you are into city
             | life. I don't live far away from the city centre but have
             | nature around, depending where you live on Earth it's not
             | mutually exclusive to have access to both.
             | 
             | So the issue is noise, the rest are trade-offs one can make
             | but I'd venture to say that almost absolutely no one would
             | choose "noisy environment" as a preference for their
             | lifestyle.
        
         | globular-toast wrote:
         | 99% of noise is cars and motorbikes. The correct approach is
         | not to invent some high-tech workaround but to go after the
         | source of the problem. Otherwise it's like spending time micro-
         | optimising a program that solves the wrong problem.
         | 
         | We don't even need to do anything radical like getting rid of
         | cars. They can be quiet. Just ban loud vehicles. Force the use
         | of quiet tyres on the road. Do not allow modifications that
         | remove silencers etc. to be used on the road. Race tracks
         | already implement a SPL test for cars at the exhaust. It would
         | be dead easy to implement this for road cars. Already you've
         | probably eliminated the need for anything high-tech for most
         | people.
         | 
         | Then, for the next level, we need to keep driving cars out of
         | our living spaces. Considering the bicycle exists, there is no
         | need for people to transport their bodies from the outside of
         | town to the inside at an average speed of less than 15mph[0].
         | It's insane.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-
         | do...
        
           | GrinningFool wrote:
           | > 99% of noise is cars and motorbikes
           | 
           | If you live in the city, sure. But 99% of the noise I deal
           | with is family members going about their lives. Would love a
           | solution to help prevent sound transfer indoors, so that I
           | can focus (and sleep) better.
        
             | KingMob wrote:
             | Tell your family to stop motorbiking to the bathroom in the
             | middle of the night. Bam, problem solved.
        
             | jaggederest wrote:
             | Already exists, same as is used for any other
             | soundproofing. Rockwool insulation, resilient channels and
             | a second layer of drywall, mass loaded vinyl, acoustic
             | panels and tapestries (can hide some more mass loaded vinyl
             | in there too), acoustic adhesive, scored screws to kill
             | floor squeaks. They're all quite expensive but hey! Very
             | DIY accessible.
             | 
             | For exterior noise the biggest bang for the buck is
             | replacing windows. I had some soundproof windows put onto
             | my previous house and you could close the door on a parade
             | going by and not even know it was happening.
        
               | smeej wrote:
               | Curtains add a flexibility to the use of space that walls
               | do not. If I only have overnight guests very
               | occasionally, I don't want to wall in part of my living
               | room to accommodate them, but I'd love to be able to hang
               | a curtain from some removable hooks that would give them
               | some real noise privacy.
        
             | jusssi wrote:
             | Go countryside, they said, it'll be quiet.
             | 
             | Except for: tractors, harvesters, mopeds, quadbikes,
             | chainsaws, circular saws, nailguns, lawnmowers,
             | leafblowers, snowblowers, diesel generators, motorboats,
             | skijets, snowmobiles.
        
               | ku1ik wrote:
               | This.
               | 
               | I moved to a countryside 2 years ago, escaping from city
               | noise. Now, I'm going back (although to the outer, more
               | quiet side of the city) because I'm going mad -
               | lawnmowers, dogs, tractors, diesel generators, dogs,
               | dogs, lawnmowers, dogs, ...
        
           | est wrote:
           | > 99% of noise is cars and motorbikes
           | 
           | EVs are incredibly quiet. (but yes they still honk)
        
             | dns_snek wrote:
             | Only at very low speeds, past 30km/h (18mph) the noise from
             | the tyres starts to approach or surpass the noise from the
             | engine so they're nearly equivalent.
        
               | rplnt wrote:
               | Yes, but then there are few idiots with modified cars (or
               | most motorbikes in general) that are orders of magnitudes
               | louder and can be heard from kilometers away.
        
               | harywilke wrote:
               | There are efforts to attack the car tyre noise problem by
               | grinding groves into the surface of the road. it's called
               | "Next Generation Concrete Surface" I remember hearing
               | about it on the "Twenty Thousand Hertz" podcast [0] [0]
               | https://www.20k.org/episodes/sonicutopia
        
               | PeterStuer wrote:
               | We had grooved concrete here some decades ago. Luckily
               | they got rid of those as the noise was _much_ worse than
               | normal surfaces.
        
             | adrianN wrote:
             | EVs are now required to make a noise at low speeds and at
             | high speeds tires dominate. The best option is fewer cars,
             | the second best option is lower speed limits (with
             | enforcement!).
        
             | infecto wrote:
             | The majority of noise is not from the ICE itself but from
             | the noise of the tires on the pavement. EVs have the same
             | issues as all other vehicles.
        
             | SkyPuncher wrote:
             | We live on a semi-main road. Normal engines aren't really
             | noticeable or annoying. Nearly all of the road noise is
             | generated by tires with a fraction coming from large truck
             | engines and vehicles with broken exhausts.
             | 
             | Tires are shockingly loud.
        
               | photonbeam wrote:
               | Smooth roads really help with this, but no one seems to
               | care
        
               | SkyPuncher wrote:
               | Smooth roads come with grip problems - especially in the
               | rain.
        
           | AlecSchueler wrote:
           | Very true. One of the remarkable things about Dutch cities is
           | how quiet they are. Sometimes I step outside and just hear
           | nothing and it's almost unsettling. Never experienced that in
           | cities at home in Ireland were cars dominante, even in cities
           | less than half the size.
        
             | financypants wrote:
             | In Switzerland I believe they have a noise ordinance on
             | Sundays - no loud noises, incl. especially things like lawn
             | mowers allowed on Sundays.
        
           | balder1991 wrote:
           | Unfortunately that's a social problem that one person can't
           | solve alone. Here in Brazil it seems to be a common problem
           | that individuals looking for attention will modify their
           | motorbikes to be extremely loud and I've never seen this kind
           | of thing getting much outrage from other people. They treat
           | it as normal and police seem to have more pressing things to
           | worry about.
        
             | konschubert wrote:
             | In Paris they added automatically ticketing noise/detecting
             | cameras.
             | 
             | It's a matter of people wanting it.
        
           | smeej wrote:
           | Just because there are bigger problems, it doesn't mean there
           | isn't demand to solve smaller ones.
           | 
           | For example, most of the churches where I live have a big
           | meeting room underneath their main worship space. This room
           | has curtains to divide it into smaller spaces for a dozen or
           | more different meetings, including Sunday school, where a
           | dozen (often noisy) children might be in each room.
           | 
           | Having curtains that genuinely reduce the noise between the
           | areas would make a huge difference! It would reduce the
           | demand to build new buildings with separate walled rooms that
           | wouldn't be used most of the time.
           | 
           | Adding flexibility of use to larger spaces with a variety of
           | demands is a problem worth solving, even if it's not as big
           | of a problem as motor vehicle noise in large cities.
        
           | forgotusername6 wrote:
           | Where I am right now 99% of the noise is coming from animals.
           | The birds are non stop dawn til dusk and there is currently a
           | dog barking...
        
             | queuebert wrote:
             | Same here. Loudest noise is one of my servers, but after
             | that is birds and cicadas. I wish I could make the birds
             | shut the hell up, but that sounds like the start of a
             | horror movie.
        
           | TacticalCoder wrote:
           | > 99% of noise is cars and motorbikes.
           | 
           | I live atm in a place not too far from an airport: I see
           | planes at a distance several times a day, big ones.
           | 
           | I cannot hear them: triple-glazed windows everywhere in the
           | apartment. It works.
           | 
           | I hate noise: since forever I assemble (or have the shop
           | assemble for me) PCs that are extremely quiet. Otherwise I
           | will hear it. AMD 7700X CPU in "eco" mode (in the BIOS) and
           | Noctua cooler/fan, Be Quiet! PSU, Be Quiet! tower. No GPU
           | besides the CPU's iGPU (so it's fanless). I cannot _hear_
           | that thing.
           | 
           | Then I love music. I'll hear that one loose bolt that did
           | detach and is now vibrating in the system ceiling when I
           | listen to music.
           | 
           | Noisy fridge, fans (there's one in one of the toilet), this
           | or that device humming: there are many source of noise
           | _inside_ your place that can be really annoying when your
           | place is quiet.
           | 
           | Besides the triple-glazed windows, the (small) building is
           | well built: no common walls with neighbors on the same floor
           | (it's the stairs and elevator that do separate the
           | apartments). Only 8 apartments. Very smart architecture.
           | Ultra quiet.
           | 
           | > The correct approach is not to invent some high-tech
           | workaround but to go after the source of the problem.
           | 
           | You've never tried a place with properly installed triple-
           | glazed windows: you'll be surprised. I'm not saying cars
           | shouldn't be less noisy but making your living place quieter
           | ain't that complicated: (quality and properly installed)
           | triple-glazed windows and call it a day.
        
             | xavxav wrote:
             | These are all valid points, I also very annoyed at noisy
             | home appliances (fridges...), but I'm always shocked by how
             | loud it is as soon as you step outside. I remember during
             | the first lockdown I would take walks out in Paris and it
             | was so quiet and peaceful; the sheer quantity of decibels
             | originating from motorized vehicles is insane.
        
             | globular-toast wrote:
             | I also like fresh air, though.
        
             | axelthegerman wrote:
             | Happy for you, most houses I visited in Canada are so
             | poorly insulated (noise and temperatures) that it's
             | laughable and triple glased windows would just move the
             | problem from windows to walls.
             | 
             | Asked a home building company if they build with concrete
             | (not that you couldn't insulate a wood construction though)
             | and they scoffed saying it would take 15 years to recoup
             | the costs through energy savings... Which doesn't sound
             | that long to me, it's a house not a car
        
           | paulsutter wrote:
           | > Force the use of quiet tyres on the road
           | 
           | Could you expand on this? Above 20-30mph tire noise is the
           | dominant noise from vehicles [1] and I haven't yet found a
           | reference that shows significant reduction by choice of tires
           | 
           | Personally I think we need to put cars underground - without
           | tunnels we'll be in traffic hell forever[2]. And imagine the
           | quiet.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/sustainability/articles
           | /ti...
           | 
           | [2] Elon Musk
        
             | globular-toast wrote:
             | When you buy tyres they actually come with a dB rating, at
             | least in the EU. See: https://www.protyre.co.uk/car-help-
             | advice/tyre-selection/wha...
        
           | vladvasiliu wrote:
           | > 99% of noise is cars and motorbikes.
           | 
           | It depends on where you live. My apartment building is older,
           | built before acoustic norms came into effect. I can hear my
           | neighbor two floors up wake up in the middle of the night to
           | take a pee.
           | 
           | I have 0 issues with traffic or other city noise, even though
           | I like having my windows open and live in Paris, one of the
           | densest cities in the world.
        
           | tsss wrote:
           | Cars aren't the sort of noise that I primarily care about.
           | Neighbors with their god-awful dogs and children that scream
           | and hit the walls 24/7 are far worse.
        
           | nayuki wrote:
           | > 99% of noise is cars and motorbikes
           | 
           | See Not Just Bikes' "Cities Aren't Loud: Cars Are Loud":
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTV-wwszGw8
        
         | lloydatkinson wrote:
         | As I read your comment I became aware of just how loud a simple
         | standing fan I have currently behind me is, even on the lowest
         | of settings. Fan design feels comically lacking in this regard.
         | I am sure it could be much quieter even when faster.
         | 
         | Dyson fans are meant to be quieter, but for a premium.
        
         | blueaquilae wrote:
         | I suspect this can explain a lot of the IQ loss since it become
         | difficult to build concentration.
        
           | shawabawa3 wrote:
           | What IQ loss? IQ scores have consistently increased over time
        
             | simonsarris wrote:
             | I'm afraid your knowledge is a bit out of date. Even Flynn
             | has given talks about the "reverse Flynn effect" in the
             | past three decades. IQ scores have been going down.
             | 
             | Recently: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii
             | /S016028962...
        
               | pixl97 wrote:
               | My suspicion on this is not the noise from the device, or
               | even the devices themselves are the problem... It's that
               | we sit on our ass all day watching/listening to them.
               | Brain health is correlated to exercise and movement.
        
           | shepherdjerred wrote:
           | If we're talking about concentration, social media/devices
           | likely play a _much_ larger part.
        
           | mrtesthah wrote:
           | Insofar as traffic is concerned, any drop in IQ would be more
           | likely related to PM2.5 pollution levels than noise:
           | 
           | https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/air-
           | pol...
        
         | goda90 wrote:
         | A quieter world is one where the outdoors is quieter because we
         | stop producing so much noise in the first place. This would
         | benefit us and wildlife, which are very negatively impacted by
         | not just our classic pollution but our noise and light
         | pollution too.
        
           | 2trill2spill wrote:
           | Agreed, its one of the many reasons I cant wait for the shift
           | from ICE vehicles to EVs, they are just so much quieter.
        
             | nixass wrote:
             | If you're nearby any moderately busy road it's not the
             | engine what makes noise but the tires and then air going
             | around the car. Engine/exhaust noise is a problem but easy
             | to solve
        
               | pixl97 wrote:
               | Yep, there are plenty of ICE vehicles that are quite. A
               | large number of cars/small trucks that are loud are
               | designed that way because the roaring engine noise sells
               | the car.
        
               | BeFlatXIII wrote:
               | I believe it bas to do more with vehicular speed than
               | business. At low speeds, engine noise dominates; on a
               | freeway, it's the tyres.
        
               | lolinder wrote:
               | > Engine/exhaust noise is a problem but easy to solve
               | 
               | It's easy from a technical standpoint but practically
               | impossible from a human one. The vast majority of people
               | simply don't notice or care that some large percentage of
               | vehicles are intentionally modified to be louder than the
               | legal maximum. Police won't enforce it, and most citizens
               | barely register the noise as present, much less a
               | problem.
               | 
               | Banning ICE vehicles altogether may very well be the only
               | thing that actually gets the problem solved, since that
               | actually has _more_ momentum behind it than enforcement
               | of existing noise regulations does.
        
               | ldoughty wrote:
               | I'm not sure "large percentage" is a statement I'd agree
               | with, my searching skills are failing me, do you have any
               | kind of source for that? I'd be shocked if it was over
               | 5%...
        
               | cassianoleal wrote:
               | I live near a medium-busy street. I haven't seen actual
               | numbers but it wouldn't surprise me if at peak hours
               | there are over 100 cars passing per minute.
               | 
               | If 5% of those are overly loud, that's an average of a
               | very loud noise every 3 seconds, and most of them will
               | take somewhere between 5 and 10 seconds to come and
               | finally go away. If you don't think that's large, we have
               | very different noise thresholds.
        
               | lolinder wrote:
               | I guess "large" is subjective. 1-5% is the ballpark I
               | have in my head based on experience, which qualifies as
               | "large" to me when I get passed by thousands of cars a
               | day.
               | 
               | The hard numbers I'm aware of are about motorcycles,
               | which have _much_ higher rates of illegal modifications
               | than other vehicles. This source documents a bunch of
               | other sources, with estimates ranging from 40-70%:
               | 
               | https://noisefree.org/sources-of-noise/motorcycles/
        
               | mrtesthah wrote:
               | Quiet asphalt is a thing:
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTV-wwszGw8
        
               | llsf wrote:
               | I found this to be true for cars and maybe trucks, but
               | not for motorbikes. Some extreme motorbikes rattle all
               | parked cars and trigger alarms.
               | 
               | When Harley-Davidson and other moppet/scooters would be
               | all electric, that would be quitter.
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | "When Harley-Davidson and other moppet/scooters would be
               | all electric, that would be quitter."
               | 
               | Not that easy, the electric Harley is intentionally
               | louder than the combustion version - because people want
               | them loud.
               | 
               | (I am not a fan of banning in general, but banning noise
               | is fine by me)
        
               | Alupis wrote:
               | > If you're nearby any moderately busy road it's not the
               | engine what makes noise but the tires and then air going
               | around the car.
               | 
               | You cannot even hear modern ICE cars running unless you
               | are really close to them. My neighbor's garage door
               | opener is louder than his ICE car...
               | 
               | Road noise is tires/air like you mentioned. Not a real
               | way to deal with that.
        
             | pixl97 wrote:
             | Yes and no at the same time. Tire noise is significant
             | which is also a function of vehicle weight, speed, and tire
             | design. You tend not to notice the tire noise as most of
             | our interaction with cars is in places like parking lots
             | where engine noise is much more pronounced.
        
               | johnchristopher wrote:
               | Depends what we are talking about. In Europe, uber EV
               | moped drivers are sooooo much nicer than the regular
               | ones. Most of our interaction with cars are on side
               | walks, along moving cars.
        
             | tayo42 wrote:
             | There is still honking, car alarms, and bass
        
           | ineedaj0b wrote:
           | You might be forgetting about how loud birds can be. At least
           | twice a week I'll wake up to birds chirping until at least
           | 7am.
           | 
           | They are extremely loud, second only to no muffler cars and
           | sport bikes blasting through deserted back roads.
           | 
           | If you live in the woods with trees, they'll sound as loud as
           | the ocean. If you live near the ocean, well that's always
           | loud.
           | 
           | The biggest offenders are:
           | 
           | 1. cars/trucks 2. birds 3. airplanes 4. ac units 5. ocean 6.
           | wind with trees
           | 
           | You'd never know trees sound like the ocean if you aren't
           | around trees. Trains are loud but intermittent. And trains
           | don't run very often anymore where I am.
        
             | lupire wrote:
             | DDT helps with the birds.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | So does a pellet gun.
               | 
               | GP is very right. To this day, I know that if I don't go
               | to sleep until ~03:30, I might just as well stay up -
               | when the birds wake and start making noise, I won't be
               | able to sleep at all. Cars, trams, trains, I can tune
               | out. There's something about bird chirps that makes them
               | impossible for my brain to ignore. It's worse than loud
               | snoring.
        
               | wahnfrieden wrote:
               | earplugs
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | Cicadas. Jesus Christ.
        
             | spinach wrote:
             | What about lawn mowers/leaf blowers/snow blowers? And dogs.
        
         | rtkwe wrote:
         | We know quite a bit about how to block and mitigate sound the
         | issue is it's transmitted through the air which we want to move
         | around for other reasons so it's tough to block one without
         | making stuffy areas.
        
       | rolandog wrote:
       | > The sound-suppressing silk builds off the group's prior work to
       | create fabric microphones.
       | 
       | >In that research, they sewed a single strand of piezoelectric
       | fiber into fabric. Piezoelectric materials produce an electrical
       | signal when squeezed or bent. When a nearby noise causes the
       | fabric to vibrate, the piezoelectric fiber converts those
       | vibrations into an electrical signal, which can capture the
       | sound.
       | 
       | Well, that is ... disconcerting. A slightly funny and dystopian
       | future comes to mind of world leaders having to get naked to
       | ensure they're not being spied on by the possibly nation-state-
       | hacked ad-tracker-subsidized clothes.
        
       | olleromam91 wrote:
       | Cool research. The assessed conditions are very tightly
       | controlled, and I wish they better described the sensing
       | mechanism used for the feedback in the "vibration mediated
       | suppression" method. but the new material approach is promising
       | however, as it's much less intrusive than other approaches.
        
       | Jailbird wrote:
       | My first thought was that airplanes need noise canceling for the
       | engine sounds. There's a real difference in a long flight with
       | and without noise canceling headphones. Effective (better?) noise
       | cancelation for the whole cabin would be impactful.
        
         | johnvanommen wrote:
         | It's difficult if not impossible to do active noise
         | cancellation for multiple people simultaneously.
        
       | sheepscreek wrote:
       | What a time to be alive! Excited at the prospect of quieter cars,
       | better noise cancelling headphones, quieter airplanes...
       | 
       | My only wish is for a fabric that doesn't involve poor silkworms.
        
       | nashashmi wrote:
       | Question for research: Do these sound absorbing properties also
       | exist in plant leafs?
        
       | prepend wrote:
       | Would this work with fabrics so we have clothes that give us
       | quiet zones around us?
        
       | smolder wrote:
       | Reading the comments here seems to indicate to me people don't
       | know a lot about the subject areas surrounding noise like
       | acoustics and building construction, but I think that just
       | reflects society more broadly.
       | 
       | The amount of investment in mitigating noise pollution is pretty
       | underwhelming, partly because it's expensive, I think, but
       | largely from ignorance. I tried to get a former general manager
       | to acoustically treat a big obnoxiously echoey open floor space
       | and their solution was to ignore everything I said and buy some
       | annoying white noise generators, which misunderstands the problem
       | we had with the space. Tons of apartment buildings cheap out on
       | isolation in a really tragic way, where the difference to quality
       | of life could be big with only minor adjustments to plans. The
       | most tragic from my experience: when some builder decided to skip
       | putting a real wall between neighboring apartments' bedrooms.
       | Instead there were closets constructed from a single 3/4" layer.
       | That "wall" couldn't stop a snore.
        
         | llsf wrote:
         | The particularly frustrating part is that is usually way
         | cheaper to put sound barriers during construction, than
         | retrofitting later on.
         | 
         | We have been discussing this with my neighbors. We are both
         | committed to eventually pull the trigger to retrofit, but the
         | initial estimate is $70K and one apartment being under heavy
         | construction for months...
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | Maybe you should arrange to do it at the same time and get
           | temporary rentals somewhere else.
           | 
           | Presumably you're doing a shared wall, but having the plumber
           | or electrician out for two jobs is probably cheaper than
           | having them out twice, right? Especially since there will be
           | similarities in the levels of stupid they find in the walls.
        
         | jauntywundrkind wrote:
         | It'd be great if there were better ways for consumers to
         | understand what they're getting.
         | 
         | A semi recent house hunting trip involved trying to shout
         | between rooms, going outside and banging on pots and pans. Very
         | informal ways of trying to guess.
         | 
         | It's be wonderful if there were some standard ways to assess,
         | that builders could advertise. Figuring out how to make a
         | rating that is both not crazy expensive to assess, and also
         | meaningful enough that consumers place some level of trust in
         | it isnt easy.
         | 
         | But wow, it feels like there has to be visibility into what we
         | get to drive change. And right now there's just so few ways to
         | know what you're getting.
        
         | johnchristopher wrote:
         | N=1 but in my personal experience most people don't care about
         | loud sound levels anymore. Neither when they produce it nor
         | when they are experiencing it. I blame two things: a) they are
         | already deaf anyway b) I am getting grumpier and have always
         | been more sensible to noise than others.
        
           | simoncion wrote:
           | > ...most people don't care about loud sound levels anymore.
           | 
           | It's probably less this and more (at least in the US) that
           | it's very, very, very hard to find "multi-family" housing
           | that's not soul-crushingly substandard [0], so at some point
           | you just give up and try to do a reasonably good job of
           | balancing "living your damn life" with "not making so much
           | noise as to be enormously obnoxious too often".
           | 
           | [0] It might be true that very few USians have ever lived in
           | a place with actually adequate acoustic insulation... so very
           | few folks even would think to look for it.
        
           | neves wrote:
           | I use earplugs :-)
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | You ever eat while wearing earplugs?
        
         | throw__away7391 wrote:
         | To me it is always a crazy feeling to visit some old school
         | restaurant or bar with heavy drapes/carpets/textiles covering
         | the flat surfaces. They have a feeling of almost being
         | haunted/enchanted, but the exact reason isn't necessarily
         | obvious. The sound of people talking around you takes on a
         | peculiar quality and feels simultaneously warm and more distant
         | than it actually is.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | I miss the big overstuffed booths. I don't like the person
           | behind me wiggling, but I didn't realize how much sound they
           | ate until they were gone.
           | 
           | Where are you finding these old school restaurants? We need
           | to make lists.
        
             | stevage wrote:
             | I once paid someone on airtasker to research me ten cafes
             | in Melbourne that have carpet. They only found one, and I
             | already knew it. It has since closed.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | Restaurants opted for ease of cleaning about 40 years ago and
         | that changeover happened fast enough that some adults here
         | probably never really experienced a restaurant situations where
         | you could have a conversation without raising your voice.
         | 
         | Long ago when Red Robin still had good food, I didn't want to
         | go there because it was loud as all fuck in their restaurants.
         | Now every restaurant is exactly the same.
         | 
         | Wearing earplugs while chewing is a very strange experience.
        
           | paulbgd wrote:
           | I'm looking up photos of restaurants 40+ years ago and
           | struggling to find any obvious acoustic differences in their
           | designs (I do notice carpet seems more prominent?) Do you
           | have any examples of what they used to do better?
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | Booths, designs, and acoustic tile ceilings off the top of
             | my head.
             | 
             | They went with easy to clean floors and took out the
             | acoustic tiles leaving the ceilings and air handling
             | systems bare and echoic.
             | 
             | In fancy buildings you also had a lot of decorative wood
             | and molding breaking up the sound. And those embossed tin
             | tiles, covered with a few layers of paint.
        
             | karaterobot wrote:
             | Obviously it varies widely by restaurant and location, but
             | in general I'd agree with the statement that restaurants
             | are a bit louder than they used to be. I'm talking about
             | table service restaurants, rather than fast food. I think
             | the reason is probably that real estate is more expensive
             | now, so restaurants are trying to pack people closer
             | together. Architectural styles are different as well, with
             | spaces being more open, ceilings higher, and more hard
             | surfaces (how many new restaurants have carpet?). There may
             | be differences in people's behavior too, but I can't say
             | that for sure.
             | 
             | For a while during covid, a place I would go to on occasion
             | had full-height plexiglass dividers between each booth. It
             | made such a huge difference in noise, I was sad when they
             | got rid of them.
        
           | Alupis wrote:
           | Red Robin isn't exactly the type of restaurant I would think
           | of when I want a quiet table - it is half a sport's bar after
           | all.
           | 
           | If you go to a nicer restaurant, you will get a quiet table.
           | It's the type of restaurant that matters - not so much
           | acoustic design.
        
       | class3shock wrote:
       | If you came looking for actual numbers the closest they come is
       | saying "in vibration-mediated suppression mode it could reduce
       | sound transmission up to 75%".
        
       | theGnuMe wrote:
       | Awesome. I'll buy the curtains or piezo electric fiber windows
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-10 23:00 UTC)