Chock-Full Church Made Choral Clarity
A doctoral student performed acoustic archaeology to determine how music could have been properly appreciated in a cavernous 16th-century church. Sarah Fecht reports
SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Venice's Church of the Most Holy Redeemer has held a musical celebration every year since its construction in 1592. And recently, the church has inspired debate among historians: How could its echoing chambers clearly portray the complicated music performed during the festival?
A New York University doctoral student named Braxton Boren decided to find out. He recorded a choir within a non-echoing chamber. [first sound sample]
Next, he fed that audio into a computer simulation that he built based on the dimensions and materials of the church. [second sound sample] The muddled reverberations matched actual acoustic measurements taken within the empty church, demonstrating that the simulation was accurate.
Finally, Boren recreated what the music sounded like when the church was filled with sound-absorbing tapestries and people. [third sound sample] The new simulation reduced reverberations from seven seconds long to three and a half, making the music much clearer.
And so Boren settled the argument. Although to some historians he was preaching to the choir.
—Sarah Fecht
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber
