Comments on: Subway Noise Revisited

By: edmund mooney

edmund mooney — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:54:38 +0000

Interesting,

I am the co-chair of an org called NYSAE or the New York Society for Acoustic Ecology and we are deeply interested in this subject matter as well as any involving the nyc soundscape. You should consider joining. Maybe you would consider giving a presentation to the group. let me know if i can contact you directly. check out the website at http://www.nyacousticecology.org

edmund mooney

By: Subway Noise Complaints Echo Down the Years - City Room Blog - NYTimes.com

Subway Noise Complaints Echo Down the Years - City Room Blog - NYTimes.com — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:18:18 +0000

[...] brief history of subway noise. [2nd Avenue [...]

By: Kid Twist

Kid Twist — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:17:41 +0000

Drainage. When you see half ties in a concrete roadbed, the space in between is a drainage ditch. And at least a few people have managed to survive a fall onto to the tracks over the years by lying flat in that space while a train rolled over them.

By: R2

R2 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:01:23 +0000

That is a very good question, and one pointed out by an out-of-town visitor friend who knows a thing or two about such things. He also pointed out the wooden ties which don’t always go the full length across from rail to rail (and would this contribute to noise or otherwise make the ride bumpier? Or this is done for other reasons?). Somebody on here must know the answer to this.

There HAS to be a reason (besides the obvious one which is leaving space for expansion/contraction from varying temperatures — then again LIRR is MORE exposed to the elements….). I’ll have to ask around to see who would know the answer to that.

By: Alton

Alton — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 03:27:02 +0000

I agree there a number of ways to approach the noise issues in the stations. However, I’ve never understood why the rail lengths are welded together so poorly in the stations in the first place. You can see about a half-inch gap between them.
The near bone rattling CLACK, CLACK (pause) CLACK, CLACK is completely avoidable with less shoddy work. After all, the LIRR can create smooth welds between rails lengths at the stations I frequent, why can’t the subway folks? It seems like such a simple solution to ease a good portion of the noise issue – and likely some wear and tear on equipment.
Anyone ride the Metro in DC? The trains glide into the station without a CLACK to be heard because the welds are seamless.

By: rhywun

rhywun — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:29:38 +0000

Subway noise rarely bothers me, but the other day a train coming into my normal commute station (Rector St. R/W) caused an unholy screech the likes of which one only experiences maybe once every five years. Naturally, it was one of those ancient R’s all patched up with duct tape. I hope they sent that beast back to the shop for repairs.

By: bboyer

bboyer — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:37:40 +0000

R2, you bring up many good points. The sentence that I wrote above that you might object to was nothing more than my interpretation of the information provided in the 1974 MTA annual report:

The New York City Transit Authority held a public hearing at Hunter College on December 11, 1974 in connection with its application to UMTA for the $50 million grant. In response to public reactions expressed at that public hearing, the program now puts much more emphasis on efforts to reduce causes of wheel-rail noise and much less on station acoustical treatments.

Under the modified program, the start-up of the project to weld rail will now be expanded to at least twice what was originally proposed, and two new wheel-trueing machines are contemplated instead of one. Intensified rail grinding and wheel-trueing remain a basic part of the entire effort.

Judging from that report, which is the only evidence of the hearing that I have found, I would have to say that the MTA represents its change in policy as being affected by public opinion, at least in part. Most likely expert opinions were also heard, but the annual report’s language would lead a reader to believe that the public’s opinion mattered more than naught in 1974.

Perhaps your reluctance to believe that says something about the MTA’s reputation in 2009.

By: R2

R2 — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:10:59 +0000

Good to know that noise has been a complaint of the subway since the time it opened. You know what else has — heat.

Thanks for uncovering the 1974 hearing (pun not intended). This I find troubling: “Instead, the public overwhelmingly pressured the MTA that the more pressing issue was the elimination of wheel and brake noise.” (Not knowing the general context or any additional information other than that provided in this post, here are my thoughts)

Can’t believe they were pressured by non-experts in audition (i.e. the general public) ! If anything, BOTH approaches are needed to improve conditions for riders. Cut down on the source (squeals from the brakes, for examples) AND invest in sound-dampening technologies! Cutting down on the echoes would do wonders. Subway stations are really just caves.

What few people understand is that noise actually sounds louder to one’s ear than it actually is (as when registered by the decibel reading of an audiometer). Call it a quirk of our auditory system, if you will; it’s just the way it is.

Boiling it down, “noise” in the subway is two problems: sound intensity from things like wheels screeching on tracks AND echo/reverb when all sounds bounce off the walls.

Even with my rudimentary understanding of auditory perception, I can say investing in curing the latter would be noticed more by the riding public.