B Writes

The American ‘soundscape’ (the audio environment as experienced by a person – see Schafer, R. Murray (1977). The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World. Alfred Knopf.) is hell, and modern car culture deserves to get its teeth kicked in for various grievous offenses on this front. An exercise in excess in every aspect, from the headlights to the bass in the stereo to ostensible safety features like reverse alarms, the general goal is ‘loud’ rather than ‘cool,’ with not even a passing twinkle of a thought for the bystander’s experience. As somebody who enjoys the dubious pleasure of living in a city, at least a few times an hour without fail there will be some numbskull driving by and cleaving the soundscape in twain with an engine with the volume of a sports car but the audio qualities of a fart attached to… a 2008 Honda Civic? Who the hell gave people with these vehicles the audacity to want to be heard and then likely seen? Some sports cars I like; a beautiful Lamborghini might even deserve to be loud, because if it drew my attention I wouldn’t feel immediate disdain and there are few enough of them for it to be a curiosity and not a bother (and the noise piques my interest instead of boggling my mind – worth noting that this is a pretty hypocritical position to occupy given my general distaste for noise). However, there is absolutely no reason for the proliferation (or even legality) of engine modification without serious care taken for the quality of the sound and all end users who, although potentially controversial given the individualistic American spirit, include everyone the car drives past. Here are a number of relevant studies about car noise levels (worth noting that this is more about overall traffic noise than singular obnoxious individuals):

• https://coeh.ucdavis.edu/research/how-noise-pollution-quietly-affects-your-health
• https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/03/230322190921.htm
• https://www.acc.org/About-ACC/Press-Releases/2022/03/22/19/59/Living-Near-Noise-Pollution-Tied-to-Greater-Risk-of-Heart-Attack
• https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/how-noise-pollution-may-harm-the-heart 

An excellent example of mind-boggling car design that only takes into account the primary user are LED headlights of such intensity that they can create new road hazards. This particular case of design failure and source of constant irritation when driving at night is especially frustrating to me, given the fact headlights should be nothing other than a safety feature. Beyond the noise or the light invading my senses temporarily, I am often more bothered by the lapses of logic or selfish choices that precipitated my inconvenience and the question of what sort of society produces people and products who choose blindly to blind (or more realistically mildly inconvenience) others. Consider the creation of way-too-bright headlights as an exemplar of technological innovation without serious thought. It is evident to me that the LED manufacturers would be better served improving the lifespan of the bulbs as opposed to their maximum brightness, although given the priorities of American businesses this will not occur; profit isn’t being maximized with the creation of a better product (although I’d also argue it isn’t being maximized by making them deleteriously bright either – unless they burn out faster as a result – but whatever…)

Another safety feature which is at once necessary for certain users’ safety and deserves serious optimization due to serious issues with its implementation’s impact on all other users is the back-up alarm, maybe the most irritating part of a city’s soundscape (albeit not my least favorite of all noises, which I will get to shortly.)  The constant piercing repeated noise and failure of certain drivers to be prudent and respectful of the hundreds of people which the noise impacts by leaving the vehicle in reverse for long periods of time (which is currently happening in the background as I write this and might have inspired this particular article) is absolutely maddening for me. I could get into the concept of ‘misophonia’ (summarized, a sensitivity to noise), but I honestly think these sounds are poorly designed for anybody and not just those that find them especially unbearable. These back-up alarms are useful both for pedestrians and laborers on construction sites (among many other potential examples), but I might suggest different ‘modes’ based on the setting (city vs. suburb vs. construction site, as an example) that offer different noises; there are alternative back-up alarm systems that are less disruptive, including this one covered by Tom Scott on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa28lIGuxq8. However, it is likely there are a number of reasons why this particular source of annoyance will not change.

Something that I believe is absolutely unacceptable and, as mentioned above, baffling on the level of ‘why would anyone do this to everybody around them? Are they cognizant of the fact that there are indeed other people at all?” is the use of blowers in every suburb in America. Middle-aged-and-old men with barely any vitality, infinite free time, and a culturally-instilled tendency towards being busy have effectively invented a task for themselves and are using a tool that should genuinely be reserved for those working in landscaping to keep their suburban selves occupied until their death. The fluctuating volume, the hope that it might stop upon the occasional brief cessation of the noise, the wall/pillow/headphone-piercing quality of the sound, the complete pointlessness of the task, the fact that these people often wear noise protection while doing their non-work (indicating a level of comprehension about the noise’s impact) – I could be tortured by one of the things being used as intended. I think they should solely be for those doing the amount of leaf-moving that genuinely requires the equipment lest it become the thirteenth labor of Hercules. 

Ultimately, this article is about stakeholders in societal situations; in America, somebody buys a car and makes it as loud and bright as he or she wants, and other people that person passes are affected by it. Because the majority of the consequences are falling outside of the person making the decision nothing will change unless change is prompted externally, likely on a societal scale, which is likely unnecessary for the majority of things I spoke about here. There are many situations where we as Americans are essential stakeholders, often the most impacted people in a situation (this is not such a situation, but there are quite a number – an easy example would be something like utilities like water and electricity in a city), yet hold almost no power or access to the decision making process. Obviously with an individual’s purchase of a sports car or modification of a non-sports car the level of impact is relatively minimal, but we can make choices to create a society predicated on mutual consideration and collective discussion instead of an insular universe of people pursuing their own happiness and suffering from others’ coequal pursuit. One problem is that when the conversation happens on an individual level, one person’s concerns which may be mirrored by a dozen others can appear as selfish and thus be easily dismissed. It is about feelings of control in my space: noises that are in other peoples’ control that are loud, intrusive, or (especially) unnecessary are deeply frustrating, whereas ‘business as usual’ is not bothersome at all, even given the basic level of city noise. It is often easier for one to make an adjustment on their end to lessen the impact of these sounds than for the other person to make a change – not that I don’t often resent the forced adjustment. My failure to speak up about my frustration with things like leaf blowers in my neighborhood means I am a complicit part of the current soundscape; consider this article step one in attempting to change that.