Portland Timbers PGE Park renovation

Discussion in 'MLS: General' started by UPinSLC, Sep 21, 2010.

  1. Kejsare

    Kejsare Member+

    Portland Timbers
    Mar 10, 2010
    Virginia
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  2. FlipsLikeAPancake

    Jul 6, 2010
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This has probably already been commented on, but I've got to say my favorite part about Portland's Virtual Viewer of their new stadium is the scoreboard that lists the score as Timbers 4, Sounders 0.
     
  3. The Marquis

    The Marquis Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 13, 2007
    Washougal, WA
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    lol. More times than I can count off hand.
     
  4. Kejsare

    Kejsare Member+

    Portland Timbers
    Mar 10, 2010
    Virginia
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Still huffing away in Portland.

    The Nerd is the Word
    11/8/2010 Update

    Lots of pics on Totalnerd's Flickr account here.
     
  5. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No it doesn't, dildolicker.
     
  6. R.C.T.I.D.

    R.C.T.I.D. New Member

    Jul 22, 2010
    Portland, Oregon
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How clever. And sorry to inform you that yes, PGE's roof does enhance the sound within the stadium.
     
  7. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If only it was true that PGE's or any other stadium roof could do what the average BigSoccer poster with a C- understanding of high school physics seems to think it could do, (rattle opposing fans/players, reduce global warming, cure testicular cancer, or enhance the male orgasm) architects like me would be designing roof structures not just for their aesthetic or protective qualities, but for their ability to enhance* the sound. Of course, if we got it wrong, we'd be getting our asses sued for it not being "loud" or "pleasing" enough or some other immeasurable standard. But since that has yet to happen, it's not something that my E & O (errors & omissions) insurance policy issuer seems to be all that worried about. And they worry about all manner of shit.

    *enhance in these long winded discussions is never really defined by the people that think the roof does something other than reverberate a out of phase, distorted noise that they themselves can't hear until they and everyone around them stops screaming, if they can even perceive it, because we're always talking about sound that loses so much energy between the time it leaves the generator, travels 50-100 feet, then bounces off of dozens of oblique surfaces, losing more energy, then traveling back to the ears of the fans, which they can't perceive because you're not going to be able to perceive a 20db echo when there is 95 db of sound being generated around you, other than the distortion when you and everyone else stop yelling.

    Further, contrary to popular BigSoccer roof lore, sound does not aggregate or collect, it's energy that is readily dissipated under the most ideal conditions (ie: a small concrete box) so in places that actually do enhance or otherwise focus the sound of performance, like an amphitheater or performance hall, you see that the design of said structures is radically different than stadia because of the nature of how sound energy behaves, and with indoor spaces, measures are taken to reduce or eliminate echo because both the reverb and out of phase nature of reflected sound actually reduce the human ear's ability to perceive & process the sounds being sent to it. If clowns like you would take time to notice, you would see that modern stadia with enclosure & roofs are being built with noise reduction panels that reduce or eliminate echo so that the people in attendance can actually better perceive the cheers, chants, songs they generate as well as not have to filter & process out the so much of the low end noise for TV/Radio broadcast.
     
  8. shanary

    shanary Member

    Aug 18, 2008
    BOSTON
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Just remember fighting over this with Mr warmth is futile, you will never win even when he's wrong. I'm glad he's an architect but I'm a sound engineer and he's wrong about a lot of things and also nit picks over semantics with people, some things he says are true but he's not willing to listen to the lay person and admit that they are right in theory if maybe not on the details.

    A roof will not amplify, that is correct however the reflections off of a surface are adding another point source of the sound whereas otherwise the crowd noise would dissipate rapidly into thin air. More point sources even if it is not technically amplifying the sound will give a perceived effect of making something louder as well as making it more directional. Will it be out of phase? yes it will but not out of phase enough that it will start causing cancellations.

    I know I'm getting into a fight that I can't win because someone can't admit they are wrong and must have the last word on this issue. As he's been studying architecture for the better part of his life I've been studying sound and acoustics for the better part of my life and I just can't stand reading him cutting people down on this issue when they are not 100% wrong and he is not 100% correct. So fear not there are "professionals" who agree that roofs have effects on crowd noise.
     
  9. tab5g

    tab5g Member+

    May 17, 2002
    your excellent post and comments likely would be much more effective and carry much more weight and relevance if you had addressed some other poster as a licker of some sort.
     
  10. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Finally! Someone who may have the expertise and more importantly, back up to prove me wrong. Contrary to what you may believe, I welcome the opportunity to be corrected, if I'm wrong. Unlike others here who slink away, I will always admit if I am wrong.

    And you accuse me of nit picking over semantics, theory & detail? The only thing that matters in these situations is actual performance, not theory. And if it seems that I don't listen to the "lay person", it's because to date, their arguments have been completely and wholly based on the belief that a stadium with a roof will make X number of fans really sound like X +Y number of fans, either to themselves or on TV.

    If you really are a sound engineer, then you should have no problem explaining to the "lay person" all the calculations that you have to go through to acoustically engineer a given space or amphitheater/auditorium/band shell and how difficult it would be to do the same for the roof of a stadium. Not to mention the amount of structural engineering & cost it would take to create those structures.

    This has been my general argument from the beginning.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but the perceived effect additional crowd noise is due to the elongation of sound event caused by the echo/reflection. The ear/brain perceives it to be louder because it's adjusting from the die off of the noise being generated just around it.

    As to the addition of point source sound, you have to make certain assumptions that the shape of the roof, material of the roof and all of the intervening structure have no effect on the echo/return. Trust me they do. So when I am working on a space/structure that needs to be acoustically tuned, I listen to my acoustical engineer as to what types of shapes and surfaces he needs and what can and can't be in the way of what he needs to make it work. Then I referee the purse fight between him and structural. For the most part, the roof shape and certainly the materials of the stadiums we see in MLS & other soccer stadiums certainly aren't conducive to any type of harmonious or enhancement of the sound. If it were so, owners wouldn't be demanding acoustical dampening materials to control and eliminate as much of the echo as possible. And they are.

    I don't believe that I've ever said that it would cause cancellations, but would cause enough noise than audio/visual TV would often have to compensate for it and that there would be plenty of people that found the extra noise unpleasant to painful. Hence the growth of sound reflection/echo control measures in modern stadia.

    You know, you'd have a much better chance at winning if you actually engaged in the argument, rather than sat on the sidelines.

    Well that's a whole new argument, ain't it, Rebecca? We've moved the goalposts from me being called Satan because I had to teach half of BigSoccer what the word "amplify" means, through disproving the whole "enhancement" meme because of the scale of engineering/design/construction it would take to create roofs to do what people perceive they do to now, well, roofs have an effects on crowd noise.

    Yeah, they have effects on crowd noise. Usually ones that people like me have to hire people like you to mitigate.
     
  11. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well played, my old adversary. Well played.
     
  12. tab5g

    tab5g Member+

    May 17, 2002
    it actually wasn't, but I digress.

    really, if people want to believe it is true (in their hearts and ears) that a "roof makes things louder (i.e. better)" where's the harm in letting folks believe that?

    (yes, I understand the cost associated with roofing structures and the legitimacy of a debate about the costs/benefits of adding/including a roof or not in a design and build, but if there's going to be a roof of some sort anyway on some new/existing venue, why not let everyone be fine with the idea that crowd noise benefits from that roof?)
     
  13. Kejsare

    Kejsare Member+

    Portland Timbers
    Mar 10, 2010
    Virginia
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I now regret to have posted this in "MLS: General" and have others resurrect two week-old posts.
     
  14. profiled

    profiled Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 7, 2000
    slightly north of a mile high
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Because they then turn around and use the lack of a roof as proof that the team did something wrong to "hurt" the atmosphere that would have been so much better with the magical noise amplification powers of the roof.
     
  15. tab5g

    tab5g Member+

    May 17, 2002
    absolutely, there is that point about people complaining about the lack of a roof -- and its magical and mythical powers.

    but in the case of when a roof is there, (as I was trying to note in my post), there's no real harm in letting those fans in that venue think that the roof is a positive for the noise and crowd experience.
     
  16. Scoey

    Scoey Member

    Oct 1, 1999
    Portland
    Sweet merciful crap, this debate gets old. And for some reason, it always shows up in threads about Portland and PGE.

    Mods, can we move all these roof/amplification/reverberation debates to the (mythical) "Dead Horses for Your Beating Pleasure" sub-forum, where it can join such illustrious topics as "Nepotism," "pro/rel," "how old is Freddy Adu for real," "Rossi's a Traitor," and "Cap Michael Ricketts now!"
     
  17. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But there is a real harm when some long time employee at the stadium uses the assumed belief to sue the owner for hearing damage and (that might or might not have been caused by the stadium) not providing personal protective gear (that might or might not have been needed) leading to a change in building regulations (that isn't needed) and legislation (that isn't needed).
     
  18. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You bet your ass it does. I was hopeful that the sound engineer would engage enough to educate me on anything that he really can prove is wrong in what I say. He chose not to.

    That's just perception. I've had it in MLS General/News & Analysis, Seattle (before I was banned), San Jose (before I was banned), Dallas, Kansas City, Colorado, Salt Lake, & RBNY. And I'll have it in the next forum where someone gets a stadium. Probably never have to have it in DC though.

    Moderators are a stupid face.
     
  19. tab5g

    tab5g Member+

    May 17, 2002
    right, in that real world example, then it would be useful to care about and debate the subject. but on a message board for fans (and not long-time stadium employees who hypothetically could sue) I don't see the harm of a discussion that accepts the belief or assumption that a roof aids the atmosphere.

    (note, I would enjoy seeing this thread, or some other one like it, cited or submitted as evidence in an actual hearing damage case.)
     
  20. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If you're willing to entertain that level of factual gymnastics, then you might as well throw out the "reality" in every topic discussed on here.
     
  21. tab5g

    tab5g Member+

    May 17, 2002
    yes, one might as well.



    if "here" is a "General" sub-forum.


    (and no, I would hope to not "entertain that level of factual gymnastics" over in N&A, or in a court of law, for example.)

    but for this thread (I suppose) the reality is that PGE Park is getting or has some kind of roof as part of its renovation in preparation for MLS. in this case, I see no harm (or lack of reality) in fans believing that said roof aids the atmosphere.

    fans believe (or feel, or hear) a lot of stuff. and in general (pun intended), that's ok, imo.
     
  22. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    To quote the Master Engineer:

    "Ya canna change the laws of physics."

    If we do that, then we might as well simply allow such absurdities that FCDallas could have built downtown on a nearly free plot of land within walking distance of a to be built at some point light rail hub that connected all of the major cities & suburbs in the DFW metro, Mayor Daley wanted to build the Fire a stadium right next to Soldier Field and that there is enough interest in soccer in the US to compete financially with the EPL/Serie A/LaLiga
     
  23. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You forgot the best one, namely the notion that a roof over the east stands at PHP would've done jack or shit to shade anyone in the stadium.
     
  24. tab5g

    tab5g Member+

    May 17, 2002
    No one is asking for the laws of physics to be changed or ignored.

    But in a General forum, it can be agreed to not ignore how some or many fans may feel about something.

    Again, I see no harm (or lack of reality) in fans believing that said roof in Portland aids or will aid the atmosphere.
     
  25. The Devil's Architect

    Feb 10, 2000
    The American Steppe
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That is precisely what is being asked.

    Somehow, I doubt I've changed that many closed minds on the subject and as those threads go on, I don't really care. Only that I silence the purveyors of ignorance.

    Well, on a rainy afternoon, it certainly does.
     

Share This Page