Page 16 - spaces4learning, Fall 2020

spaces4learning ACOUSTICS
WHEN THE
CURTAIN FALLS
ON OLD SPACES: RETROFITTING UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS FOR SOUND MASKING
In order to create a more productive, less stressful atmosphere, Scott Hall at U of MN, Twin Cities needed sound masking.
By Jeff Johnson
LIKE A LOT OF SCHOOLS, THE UNIVERSITY OF Minnesota (U of MN), Twin Cities campus is replete with his- toric architecture. And, while their foundations and presence have survived the tests of time, their uses have often changed. Evolving a 19th-century building to meet 21st-century needs poses a laundry list of challenges.
From 1920s Music Hall to 2020s Office Space
When Scott Hall was opened in 1923, it was created as the U of MN’s Music Building, complete with both classroom space and a grand auditorium. The Renaissance revival architectural style meant the auditorium featured an ornate interior capped by a lavish ceiling, together creating the atmosphere of opulence closely associated with theater buildings of the era. But, like so many historic university buildings, its current purpose is much different than it was in 1923.
The original theater seating has long been removed and the floor has been leveled so it can function as meeting space and offices. Still beautiful and inspiring, it remains the sort of place a creative mind would love to spend 40 hours a week — except for one, very serious, flaw: sound.
Where once the planned acoustics meant even the worst seat in the house could hear a pin drop on stage, today it means audio chaos. While the ornate, 20-foot ceilings bring light and at- mosphere to the approximately 5,000-square-foot working space, the current eight-foot, ceiling-less office walls mean there’s a lot of room for sound — and, more specifically, private conversations — to carry. In order to create a more productive, less stressful atmosphere — as well as adhering to all privacy laws — Scott Hall needed sound masking.
What Is Sound Masking
Sound masking is making an active acoustic effort to veil un- wanted sound waves — in other words, controlling noise to a positive end.
A common example is the use of a white noise machine in an office setting which provides just enough background sound so employees can focus on their tasks without being distracted by conversations happening around them.
If you’re lucky, the machines are appropriately spaced and the white noise is evenly distributed around the room. If not, you could be stuck in a too-hot spot where the artificial sound is deafening and distracting by itself — or in a cold zone where it barely reaches you, and you can still hear others talking with enough clarity to be disruptive.
Why Sound Masking Matters
Productivity and Focus: We know for a fact that noise af- fects employee productivity. In study after study, the psycholog- ical effects of unwanted or disturbing sound on the workplace have been well documented. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that workplace noise adversely af- fects the lives of millions of people, resulting in complaints of stress-related illnesses, high blood pressure, and hearing loss.
When a physical space offers a little passive noise control, such as high cubicle walls, private offices or softer, sound-ab- sorbing materials, the effects on the well-being of each person — as well as their productivity — can be profoundly impacted.
According to a study by the University of California, Irvine, productivity decreases by as much as 40 percent when impacted by noise and distractions. The study found that employees are interrupted once every 11 minutes, and it can take as much as 23 minutes to get back on task.
In the offices and meeting spaces of Scott Hall, it’s near- ly impossible to avoid overhearing conversations. This creates a natural dynamic known as “sound supremacy” — when one group is distracted by another’s talking, they instinctively raise their own voices to be better heard. This, in turn, causes other groups to speak more loudly — ultimately creating a cacopho- ny of competitive conversations. At its best, this phenomenon is frustrating and disruptive, but at its worst, private and sensitive in- formation is able to be overheard, thus generating awkward — and possibly even illegal — situations.
Privacy Laws: There are two privacy laws that need to be taken into consideration in terms of sound masking:
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) of 1999, which deals with
14 FALL 2020