Stonehenge Had Good Acoustics For Voice And Music

  • Context: Music 
  • Thread starter Thread starter BillTre
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Acoustics Music
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the acoustics of Stonehenge and its potential functions, including its suitability for music and voices, as well as speculative interpretations of its purpose, such as being a modern art piece or an ancient observatory. Participants explore various theories and ideas related to the historical and cultural significance of Stonehenge.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that tests of a mini-Stonehenge indicate it was acoustically suited for music and voices, implying it may have been used for gatherings.
  • Others propose that Stonehenge could be viewed as modern art, questioning its intended purpose and the interpretations of future archaeologists.
  • One participant mentions a long-term music project, arguing that such projects may not prioritize listening quality, suggesting a broader intellectual endeavor.
  • Several participants discuss the logistics of moving the stones, with some questioning why they were not built closer to the source of the blue stones in Wales.
  • There are claims about the knowledge of ancient cultures regarding construction techniques and astronomical observations, with some expressing astonishment at their capabilities without modern tools.
  • Participants explore the idea that the location of Stonehenge may have been special for reasons that are still speculative, with some suggesting that the area had significance before the stones were erected.
  • One participant discusses methods ancient cultures might have used to track celestial events, such as the winter solstice, without modern timekeeping devices.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion features multiple competing views regarding the purpose and significance of Stonehenge, with no consensus reached on its intended use or the reasons for its location.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the historical context and the reasons behind the construction and location of Stonehenge, highlighting the complexity of archaeological interpretations.

BillTre
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
2,752
Reaction score
12,020
Tests of a mini-Stonehenge indicates it was acoustically suited for music and voices.
Science News article
Original research article

Thus is was probably a good place to use for meetings of humans involving different audio features.

This argument is reminiscent (to me anyway) of a David Byrne talk on the subject of matching music with particular audio charactoristics with the venues in which they are placed:

 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970 and DennisN
Science news on Phys.org
Let us consider our world. E.g. I read these days that there (Halberstadt) is a music project, i.e. one play that is supposed to end in 2,600 something. They change it chord by chord every few(?) months. Or have a look on what people do for sports. E.g. you can find iron rings in the middle of a giant rock.Or look at our monuments. E.g. the Christ statue in Rio de Janeiro.

What would future archeologists say if our species has long been gone?

That leads me to the question: What if Stonehenge was simply modern art?
 
fresh_42 said:
a music project, i.e. one play that is supposed to end in 2,600 something. They change it chord by chord every few(?) months.
Such a long term project does not sound like something to sit and listen to somewhere.
Its more like an intellectual project in doing something different for the sake of being different, not for listening to. Probably could be heard in any setting (or a variety of settings, distributed over time, as someone lives their life). Actual listening quality is probably not a very important aspect of it.

fresh_42 said:
Or have a look on what people do for sports. E.g. you can find iron rings in the middle of a giant rock.Or look at our monuments. E.g. the Christ statue in Rio de Janeiro.

What would future archeologists say if your species has long been gone?
The use and functions of a lot of stuff found by archeologists, is not well explained in the societies that generated them.

fresh_42 said:
That leads me to the question: What if Stonehenge was simply modern art?
I would call it ancient art!
 
Arrangements of pillars are very good acoustically. I recently went to a concert in a parking structure. Very nice.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
pinball1970 said:
I like the idea it was the first human observatory. There are stones that align with key solstice date and ancient remains have been found there.

https://www.astronomytrek.com/was-stonehenge-an-ancient-observatory/
I know. If I am taught correctly, then already the blue stones which were set up first originated from Wales. Why in the world didn't they build it there in the first place?
 
fresh_42 said:
I know. If I am taught correctly, then already the blue stones which were set up first originated from Wales. Why in the world didn't they build it there in the first place?
It was easier to move the stones than to commute to Wales every time you wanted to use it. The stones in the Aubry holes required daily movement.
 
Hornbein said:
It was easier to move the stones than to commute to Wales every time you wanted to use it. The stones in the Aubry holes required daily movement.
This isn't convincing. Firstly, why did they require daily maintenance? Secondly: they gathered from all over the island, which means the Scottish Highlands included, at least once a year, flocks of living pigs included. It seems to me that it wouldn't have mattered where they gathered. Wales would have been even less troublesome since closer to the center.
 
fresh_42 said:
Why in the world didn't they build it there in the first place?
Perhaps somebody did, and then it was later moved. Search for Waun Mawn.
fresh_42 said:
Wales would have been even less troublesome since closer to the center.
Look for the Preseli Hills on a map.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970
  • #10
fresh_42 said:
I know. If I am taught correctly, then already the blue stones which were set up first originated from Wales. Why in the world didn't they build it there in the first place?
Yes that is a puzzle, these things were not small objects. There was an interesting documentary on how they could have moved them, I cannot remember if it was mentioned Why they built it there and not over there.
Their knowledge of thingsi lke levers, wheels, pulleys and such must have been pretty good?
Not to mention their language, to build a church/lab or concert hall you need to be able to communicate your plans pretty well. Especially when your materials are 100 miles away and weigh 25 tonnes!
 
  • #11
pinball1970 said:
Yes that is a puzzle, these things were not small objects. There was an interesting documentary on how they could have moved them, I cannot remember if it was mentioned Why they built it there and not over there.
Their knowledge of thingsi lke levers, wheels, pulleys and such must have been pretty good?
Not to mention their language, to build a church/lab or concert hall you need to be able to communicate your plans pretty well. Especially when your materials are 100 miles away and weigh 25 tonnes!
I am also astonished at how these cultures, not only neolithic but also Maya or Egyptian people figured out the winter solstice without a clock! I mean I would have been satisfied with something around Christmas. As if one day appeared longer or shorter than another. How did they know?
 
  • #12
pinball1970 said:
I cannot remember if it was mentioned Why they built it there and not over there.
I believe it is generally accepted that the area, and perhaps the specific location, was already "special" for one or more reasons before any stones were brought there. Exactly what those reasons were is the subject of much speculation (a large amount of which is nonsense) and some proper research.

pinball1970 said:
Yes that is a puzzle, these things were not small objects... Not to mention their language, to build a church/lab or concert hall you need to be able to communicate your plans pretty well. Especially when your materials are 100 miles away and weigh 25 tonnes!
The bluestones that came from a straight-line distance of about 150 miles* away that are still on site are smaller, up to five tonnes although most are two to three tonnes (the "altar stone" is about six tonnes and came from a different location, probably a bit nearer in what is now Wales). You are thinking of the sarsens, which form the trilithons that we see standing today, which are about 25 tonnes; these came from "only" 20 miles or so away.

Shared between 60 people, three tonnes is 50 kg each: alternatively it is a displacement of 3 cubic metres of water. There are many possible ways to achieve this.

* they obviously didn't come on a straight line: it's about 180 miles via the M4 and the Severn Bridge, I don't think they came that way either :-p
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970
  • #13
fresh_42 said:
I am also astonished at how these cultures, not only neolithic but also Maya or Egyptian people figured out the winter solstice without a clock!
One way is by recording the length of the shadow from a tall upright. Another is to record the position of sunrise or sunset using a pair of sights separated by a considerable distance, one of which is moveable. It is easy to speculate that parts of the neolithic structures we see today could have been used for this purpose (but don't get carried away, once you start down this route you can end up believing in Prometheus theories and wearing a tin foil hat).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42 and BillTre
  • #14
fresh_42 said:
I am also astonished at how these cultures, not only neolithic but also Maya or Egyptian people figured out the winter solstice without a clock! I mean I would have been satisfied with something around Christmas. As if one day appeared longer or shorter than another. How did they know?
Astronomy back then had to do with where the paths of heavenly bodies intersect with the horizon. On the winter solstice that will be maximally south.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42 and pbuk
  • #15
Hornbein said:
Astronomy back then had to do with where the paths of heavenly bodies intersect with the horizon.
There is strong evidence for this, but I think it would be foolish to say that no other methods were used.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
  • #16
pbuk said:
There is strong evidence for this, but I think it would be foolish to say that no other methods were used.
Good thing then that I didn't say it.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K