Maya acoustics: Chichen Itza

[WVK]

14 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Well it was published 47 years ago probably based on research done 1-10 years before that. Kinda before AA became a consideration. I believe AA became important a little before 2000 - if I recall. However, acoustics were known about as it was noted that Greek and Roman theatre's worked very well allowing an audience to hear the players with ease.

 

In my experience Mesoamerican archaeologists are the last ones to be interested in acoustic phenomena. Upon arriving home aFter  experiencing the disembodied voice conversation in the Great Ball Court I contacted an archaeologist who had written an article about Chichen Itza. When Iasked k if he knew anything about the acoustics he hung up the phone..

Some time later I was advised to post questions here:

http://www.famsi.org/listinfo.html
some of the responses can be found mixed in here

https://www.tomzap.com/sounds.html

A couple of years later I was contacted by David Lubman who had developed the quetzal theory. I suggested that he post at Aztlan mentioning that there was some acoustics discussion there that I had initiated. He discovered that those discussions had been deleted. And they rejected his paper. Eventually it was posted at the insistence of one of the members.

 

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, WVK said:

In my experience Mesoamerican archaeologists are the last ones to be interested in acoustic phenomena. Upon arriving home aFter  experiencing the disembodied voice conversation in the Great Ball Court I contacted an archaeologist who had written an article about Chichen Itza. When Iasked k if he knew anything about the acoustics he hung up the phone..

Some time later I was advised to post questions here:

http://www.famsi.org/listinfo.html
some of the responses can be found mixed in here

https://www.tomzap.com/sounds.html

A couple of years later I was contacted by David Lubman who had developed the quetzal theory. I suggested that he post at Aztlan mentioning that there was some acoustics discussion there that I had initiated. He discovered that those discussions had been deleted. And they rejected his paper. Eventually it was posted at the insistence of one of the members.

 

And what does all this have to do with what i posted?

You posted a link to a publication made well before AA was a thing as evidence AA was being ignored. Yep, it doesn't include mention of something that was not considered then.

Quote

The fancy credentials don’t seem to  help when it comes to Archaeoacoustics. Here’s book devoted to the GBC, not a word about the acoustics 

Yep and it doesn't mention a number of other things that were not considered then. Like we read Maya a lot better now.... Your point was?

 

[WVK]

1 hour ago, Hanslune said:

.... Your point was?

 

To get my experience on the record.

[Hanslune]

50 minutes ago, WVK said:

To get my experience on the record.

Well great then if you wanted to 'get your experience on record' why quote my statement which had nothing whatsoever to do with you stating your experience?

[WVK]

8 hours ago, WVK said:

"I personally vouch for the acoustics at Tikal.

Years ago, while living for a year and a half with some friends who had bought some land behind Soccutz Village in Belize, we used to take the bandito highway to Tikal every few months.

Once I climbed Temple I, and proceeded to sit cross-legged with my back against the back inner room wall. I started OMing and tuning into the space.

Later, my friends asked if I was up at the top OMing? I said, yes, why? They said you could hear my OMs all over the plaza. (And I was in the back of the inner-most room, not out in front of the doors.)"

 

Tikal Quetzal clap:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2U_ytmzu68

 

[WVK]

Teotihuacan Acoustics:
This paper presents new research on the very interesting audible effects produced by the stairways of many archaeological sites in Mexico. This investigation was made at the main stairway of the pyramid at La Ciudadela, Teotihuacan archaeological site. The effect previously studied was a chirped echo reflected from the stairway at normal incidence, which resembles the singing of the Quetzal. Now it is presented with the impulsive sound source and the listeners located at different angles, where apart from the characteristic chirped sound, several musical notes could be obtained and identified, covering a range of at least one half an octave. This evaluation was made at the site, where the effect is clearly audible, and it is supported with simple mathematics.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253784810_Tonal_response_on_the_stairway_of_the_main_pyramid_at_La_Ciudadela_Teotihuacan_archaeological_site

[WVK]

On 2/6/2022 at 10:03 AM, Hanslune said:

And what does all this have to do with what i posted?

You posted a link to a publication made well before AA was a thing as evidence AA was being ignored. Yep, it doesn't include mention of something that was not considered then.

Yep and it doesn't mention a number of other things that were not considered then. Like we read Maya a lot better now.... Your point was?

 

 

On 2/6/2022 at 10:03 AM, Hanslune said:

And what does all this have to do with what i posted?

You posted a link to a publication made well before AA was a thing as evidence AA was being ignored. Yep, it doesn't include mention of something that was not considered then.

Yep and it doesn't mention a number of other things that were not considered then. Like we read Maya a lot better now.... Your point was?

 

I’m sure they were  aware off the GBC acoustic but considered it incidental.  Here’s is the only exception that I could find 

This transmission of sound, as yet unexplained, has been discussed by architects and archaeologists... Most of them used to consider it as fanciful due to the ruined conditions of the structure but, on the contrary, we who have engaged in its reconstruction know well that the sound volume, instead of disappearing, has become stronger and clearer. . . Undoubtedly we must consider this feat of acoustics as another noteworthy achievement of engineering realized millenniums ago by the Maya technicians. 

"Chi Cheen Itza" Manuel Cirerol Sansores 1947

Then in 1996 I posted to Aztlan the OP ending in this:

“I believe a good case can be made that the Maya somehow engineered these acoustical phenomena. After months of research, I cannot locate any scientific discussion or investigations regarding any of this. Any information or comments appreciated.”

https://www.tomzap.com/sounds.html

 

 

[Kenemet]

On 2/6/2022 at 3:17 PM, WVK said:

Tikal Quetzal clap:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2U_ytmzu68

 

Here's why I find archaeoacoustics to be an unlikely idea:  all the 'research' is done on ancient sites that are not being used as they were back in the day when people lived there and were engaged with the site.

Yes, you can get an interesting "chirp" if you stand in the middle of a deserted area and clap your hands.  I can do that with selected buildings here in Dallas.  But set up the area with trappings of life and things change.  The "sacred sound" can't be heard away from that spot (and in recordings where the wind is blowing... as it does there... the sound is difficult to produce.)

There's no architectural support, either --no special stone marked by carvings or a platform or symbols of deities where you stand.  You'd have to "guess and by-golly" the location unless someone trained you to stand there. 

Culturally, I don't see a lot of support for the idea.  There were dozens of different groups collectively called "Maya" -- the archaeological sites are more similar to Greek city-states than to anything else.  Each had its own practices and architectures and deities and worship methods.  None seem to have any sort of ritual that involves clapping (like you would expect if there had been major festivals and ceremonies where making quetzal sounds was a major focus.)  No historical document that I know of supports the idea...though a number of them from the time of the conquests describe Mesoamerican ceremonies.

[WVK]

2 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Here's why I find archaeoacoustics to be an unlikely idea:  all the 'research' is done on ancient sites that are not being used as they were back in the day when people lived there and were engaged with the site.

Yes, you can get an interesting "chirp" if you stand in the middle of a deserted area and clap your hands.  I can do that with selected buildings here in Dallas.  But set up the area with trappings of life and things change.  The "sacred sound" can't be heard away from that spot (and in recordings where the wind is blowing... as it does there... the sound is difficult to produce.)

There's no architectural support, either --no special stone marked by carvings or a platform or symbols of deities where you stand.  You'd have to "guess and by-golly" the location unless someone trained you to stand there. 

Culturally, I don't see a lot of support for the idea.  There were dozens of different groups collectively called "Maya" -- the archaeological sites are more similar to Greek city-states than to anything else.  Each had its own practices and architectures and deities and worship methods.  None seem to have any sort of ritual that involves clapping (like you would expect if there had been major festivals and ceremonies where making quetzal sounds was a major focus.)  No historical document that I know of supports the idea...though a number of them from the time of the conquests describe Mesoamerican ceremonies.

I If that’s the case  let’s say  a  priest is standing in front of the steps of the  Temple of the Warriors staring up at the twin statues of Quetzalcoatl  (feathered rattlesnake)  located’at the top of those  steps   Suddenly the priest claps his hands togeatherly vigorously in an effort to dispatch a large fly that has landed on his palm. One can only imagine his surprise when that clap gives voice to the deity Quetzalcoatl in the form of quetzal chirp from the stairs rattlesnake sound from the colonnade (aka sonic crystal)

[WVK]

Over the past 31 years I have been fortunate to have been in just over a thousand Mesoamerican sites, and in a number of them for extended periods of time.

While working specifically at the sites of Coba, Kukikan (a satellite of Coba) and Santa Rosa Xtampak I found there appear to be structures and complexes which take advantage of the ability of stonework to enhance acoustics. In these three sites in particular are coliseum-like complexes in which one can talk in a normal voice at "center stage" and be heard at the edges of the complexes.

I have heard the term "singing stones" used in Yucatan to describe the type of stone which bests lends itself to increased sound enhancement. The last mentions were among the remains of the Chan Santa Cruz Maya who still inhabit the region around Coba. Whether or not this is a term which goes back in time I do not know. I am an archaeologist not a linguist or epigrapher.

I personally think at some point the ancient Maya learned by accident that stone could enhance sound and certain arrangements of structures within complexes could enhance the transmission of sound. Subtlety is inherent in their architecture. I only need to point at their ability to achieve visual impact via negative batter on walls of structures designed for the privileged members of their sites. 

Mesoamerican centers in general and Maya sites in particular are externally oriented complexes of structures built for the glorification of those who rule. Imagine if you will every surface filled with "state art" supporting the privileged with sight and sound.

[WVK]

20 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Here's why I find archaeoacoustics to be an unlikely idea:  all the 'research' is done on ancient sites that are not being used as they were back in the day when people lived there and were engaged with the site.

Yes, you can get an interesting "chirp" if you stand in the middle of a deserted area and clap your hands.  I can do that with selected buildings here in Dallas.  But set up the area with trappings of life and things change.  The "sacred sound" can't be heard away from that spot (and in recordings where the wind is blowing... as it does there... the sound is difficult to produce.)

There's no architectural support, either --no special stone marked by carvings or a platform or symbols of deities where you stand.  You'd have to "guess and by-golly" the location unless someone trained you to stand there. 

Culturally, I don't see a lot of support for the idea.  There were dozens of different groups collectively called "Maya" -- the archaeological sites are more similar to Greek city-states than to anything else.  Each had its own practices and architectures and deities and worship methods.  None seem to have any sort of ritual that involves clapping (like you would expect if there had been major festivals and ceremonies where making quetzal sounds was a major focus.)  No historical document that I know of supports the idea...though a number of them from the time of the conquests describe Mesoamerican ceremonies.

“we View, looking north, of the Great Ballcourt, the largest one ever built in Mesoamerica. Its dimensions are such, many scholars have suggested that actual ballplay would have been impossible. They maintain it may have been used as a ritual space where the ballgame was never played but which was, nevertheless, charged with all the cosmological meaning of an actual ballcourt.”
“The whispering gallery permits excellent voice communication between two persons standing on the raised platform of temples on opposite ends of the ballcourt, 460 ft apart (525 ft)I It also permits two-way communication between persons on either temple and persons anywhere on the playing field between the temples.”

So the GBC provides both architectural and archaeological evidence for intentional acoustics

https://acoustics.org/pressroom/httpdocs/152nd/lubman.html

https://www.mesoweb.com/chichen/features/tour/04.html

https://roundme.com/tour/1160/view/2633/

 

[Kenemet]

On 2/11/2022 at 9:10 AM, WVK said:

“we View, looking north, of the Great Ballcourt, the largest one ever built in Mesoamerica. Its dimensions are such, many scholars have suggested that actual ballplay would have been impossible. They maintain it may have been used as a ritual space where the ballgame was never played but which was, nevertheless, charged with all the cosmological meaning of an actual ballcourt.”
“The whispering gallery permits excellent voice communication between two persons standing on the raised platform of temples on opposite ends of the ballcourt, 460 ft apart (525 ft)I It also permits two-way communication between persons on either temple and persons anywhere on the playing field between the temples.”

So the GBC provides both architectural and archaeological evidence for intentional acoustics

https://acoustics.org/pressroom/httpdocs/152nd/lubman.html

https://www.mesoweb.com/chichen/features/tour/04.html

https://roundme.com/tour/1160/view/2633/

 

Who are these "many scholars"?  I'd like to see some of what they say.   Context can be everything.   Hopefully they have some decent original sources from the Maya themselves.

[Kenemet]

On 2/10/2022 at 2:37 PM, WVK said:

I If that’s the case  let’s say  a  priest is standing in front of the steps of the  Temple of the Warriors staring up at the twin statues of Quetzalcoatl  (feathered rattlesnake)  located’at the top of those  steps   Suddenly the priest claps his hands togeatherly vigorously in an effort to dispatch a large fly that has landed on his palm. One can only imagine his surprise when that clap gives voice to the deity Quetzalcoatl in the form of quetzal chirp from the stairs rattlesnake sound from the colonnade (aka sonic crystal)

One can imagine all sorts of things.  Now imagine the same priest doing that in the middle of a busy day, with vendors and families going about their business and perhaps singing as well as the sounds of work -- and add the traditional embellishments of paint and cloth (flags were a "thing" and so forth.) 

(I find it weird that someone would slap their hands together in order to get rid of a fly instead of waving it off.)

[WVK]

12 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Who are these "many scholars"?  I'd like to see some of what they say.   Context can be everything.   Hopefully they have some decent original sources from the Maya themselves.

Page 7 2nd column 3rd paragraph

https://www.academia.edu/1273868/POLITICAL_STRUCTURE_MILITARY_TRAINING_AND_IDEOLOGY_AT_CHICHEN_ITZA

[WVK]

15 hours ago, Kenemet said:

One can imagine all sorts of things.  Now imagine the same priest doing that in the middle of a busy day, with vendors and families going about their business and perhaps singing as well as the sounds of work -- and add the traditional embellishments of paint and cloth (flags were a "thing" and so forth.) 

(I find it weird that someone would slap their hands together in order to get rid of a fly instead of waving it off.)

Move along, nothing to hear here!

[Hanslune]

3 hours ago, WVK said:

Move along, nothing to hear here!

Exactly you just keep going over the same material and whining that we aren't that interested in and certainly not up to your level of love. We aren't, stone reflects sound, kool, the Maya may have used that to create some interesting actions/sites that use sound, okay again kool. Is that AS interesting as the rest of their culture, religion and history, no it's just a small piece of it. We get it you thinks it great, sure very interesting.

Why or what are you trying obtain, do or accomplish? You keeping beat the horse getting madder and madder when no one is excited about it as you are. I have a great interest in the gunnery practices of the 1840s but you don't see me beating the subject to death, that or WWI aircraft armament and design or about an earlier burst of 'civilization' in the Eemian, etc. I don't expect anyone to get excited about those as much I am, that and exchanging insults with Harte. Why do you keep flogging the same ideas over and over again?

...and getting the same results each time

 

[WVK]

22 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Exactly you just keep going over the same material and whining that we aren't that interested in and certainly not up to your level of love. We aren't, stone reflects sound, kool, the Maya may have used that to create some interesting actions/sites that use sound, okay again kool. Is that AS interesting as the rest of their culture, religion and history, no it's just a small piece of it. We get it you thinks it great, sure very interesting.

Why or what are you trying obtain, do or accomplish? You keeping beat the horse getting madder and madder when no one is excited about it as you are. I have a great interest in the gunnery practices of the 1840s but you don't see me beating the subject to death, that or WWI aircraft armament and design or about an earlier burst of 'civilization' in the Eemian, etc. I don't expect anyone to get excited about those as much I am, that and exchanging insults with Harte. Why do you keep flogging the same ideas over and over again?

...and getting the same results each time

 

I don’t expect a different result so I have nothing to be angry  about.  The skeptical  “peer review”  here provides objections to consider and address.  Posting on a forum where everybody agrees would be  useless.  So thanks.  That archaeologists might not consider acoustics important doesn’t mean the Maya didn’t.  My goal is to change that.   It’s my hobby.

 

 

[Hanslune]

16 hours ago, WVK said:

I don’t expect a different result so I have nothing to be angry  about.  The skeptical  “peer review”  here provides objections to consider and address.  Posting on a forum where everybody agrees would be  useless.  So thanks.  That archaeologists might not consider acoustics important doesn’t mean the Maya didn’t.  My goal is to change that.   It’s my hobby.

 

 

...and right back to whining again. "That archaeologists might not consider acoustics important doesn’t mean the Maya didn’t".  No I didn't say that, anything a culture did or does is important, again you twist words to try and appear as a victim of something. You are not.

Great, you have a hobby, keep us informed of any updates....

 

PS. Long ago at the start of Internet in the late 80s there was Alt. Archaeology on USENET (or something like that) there was a fine fellow who insisted that Herculaneum was a more important  site than Pompeii. He went on and on about this for 2-3 years and became increasing angry that no one wanted to talk about exactly the same thing over and over again and that everyone 'hated Herculaneum' and didn't see how important it was.

Edited February 14, 2022 by Hanslune

[jaylemurph]

On 2/13/2022 at 2:39 PM, WVK said:

I don’t expect a different result so I have nothing to be angry  about.  The skeptical  “peer review”  here provides objections to consider and address.  Posting on a forum where everybody agrees would be  useless.  So thanks.  That archaeologists might not consider acoustics important doesn’t mean the Maya didn’t.  My goal is to change that.   It’s my hobby.

 

 

If you can’t convince /anyone/ here, you’re unlikely to convince any (other) academics. 

At best, you’re going to get a polite but firm brush-off. 

—Jaylemurph 

[WVK]

14 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

If you can’t convince /anyone/ here, you’re unlikely to convince any (other) academics. 

At best, you’re going to get a polite but firm brush-off. 

—Jaylemurph 

So it would seem, but it won’t be for lack of trying

[Hanslune]

16 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

If you can’t convince /anyone/ here, you’re unlikely to convince any (other) academics. 

At best, you’re going to get a polite but firm brush-off. 

—Jaylemurph 

Hey Jay

Convince us of what? That sound bounces of rocks - I think we all agree on that. I certainly agree the Mesoamericans may have built structures to use this function. I cleared and helped repair a number of those said structures and yep you get echos off them, but then so do you at Egyptian, Rapa Nui, Mesa Verde, Roman, Greek and other ruins. If I remember correctly we were skeptical about one of the sounds as it was reportedly from a structure that when in its prime had an extensive wooded roof which obviously no longer exists and any echos from the bare rocks may not have been there when the builders were there.

So, does Archaeo-accoustics exist, yes, is every example of AA a sign of 'advanced' planning, unknown however it is possible but given the state of some ruins not shown to be plausible in some cases. Its an interesting adjunct theory among many other theories. It's like debating the meaning of the colours used, which style of masonry utilized and the alignment of structure meant and also know how the culture, language and religion changed over time. One can speculate but not conclude..

 

[WVK]

53 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Hey Jay

Convince us of what? That sound bounces of rocks - I think we all agree on that. I certainly agree the Mesoamericans may have built structures to use this function. I cleared and helped repair a number of those said structures and yep you get echos off them, but then so do you at Egyptian, Rapa Nui, Mesa Verde, Roman, Greek and other ruins. If I remember correctly we were skeptical about one of the sounds as it was reportedly from a structure that when in its prime had an extensive wooded roof which obviously no longer exists and any echos from the bare rocks may not have been there when the builders were there.

So, does Archaeo-accoustics exist, yes, is every example of AA a sign of 'advanced' planning, unknown however it is possible but given the state of some ruins not shown to be plausible in some cases. Its an interesting adjunct theory among many other theories. It's like debating the meaning of the colours used, which style of masonry utilized and the alignment of structure meant and also know how the culture, language and religion changed over time. One can speculate but not conclude..

 

It’s one thing to talk about a sound and another to experience it. For example a TotW sounds like a giant quetzal and  a rattlesnake that sounds as long as the colonnade as sound zips down and reflects back,  all from a handclap. 
How do you compare  sonic magic to material culture in importance? What would the maya have thought of it?

 

[Trelane]

On 2/6/2022 at 6:22 AM, WVK said:

In my experience Mesoamerican archaeologists are the last ones to be interested in acoustic phenomena. Upon arriving home aFter  experiencing the disembodied voice conversation in the Great Ball Court I contacted an archaeologist who had written an article about Chichen Itza. When Iasked k if he knew anything about the acoustics he hung up the phone..

Some time later I was advised to post questions here:

http://www.famsi.org/listinfo.html
some of the responses can be found mixed in here

https://www.tomzap.com/sounds.html

A couple of years later I was contacted by David Lubman who had developed the quetzal theory. I suggested that he post at Aztlan mentioning that there was some acoustics discussion there that I had initiated. He discovered that those discussions had been deleted. And they rejected his paper. Eventually it was posted at the insistence of one of the members.

 

Do you think it's because they think you're a loon who's wasting their time with your fascination (obsession?)

[Hanslune]

8 hours ago, WVK said:

It’s one thing to talk about a sound and another to experience it. For example a TotW sounds like a giant quetzal and  a rattlesnake that sounds as long as the colonnade as sound zips down and reflects back,  all from a handclap. 
How do you compare  sonic magic to material culture in importance? What would the maya have thought of it?

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Hanslune

[WVK]

14 hours ago, Trelane said:

Do you think it's because they think you're a loon who's wasting their time with your fascination (obsession?)

I don’t know ask them. This thread was accepted on the moderated list.

http://www.famsi.org