The effects public and private sound has on a person’s soundscape is determined by how sensitized they are to it. For instance, a pedestrian who has lived their whole lives in New York City has been exposed to a plethora of noises that do not bother them because they have adapted to them. Using R. Murray Schafer’s themes to distinguish soundscapes, the sounds of New York City do not bother a civilian because they are used to the sounds of that sound mark. In conjunction to this, Hosokawa demonstrates how civilians who live in the city are able to disregard the public sounds due to their low degree of sensitivity. To illustrate, “Some people pass by, others stop. As in a concert hall, the participants are divided into two groups… linked together because both groups share their inner and outer time, “tuning each other” (Hosokawa 105). Hosokawa uses this example in his text to demonstrate musica mobilis, the voluntarily or involuntarily movement of music from one source. However, Hosokawa also presents a polar perspective of how one can block the musica mobilis and be in control of their own soundscape. For instance, Hosokawa discusses the power technological instruments can give to the listener. As Hosokawa states, “The listener seems to cut the auditory contact with the outer world where he really: seeking the perfection of his ‘individual zone of listening…” (106). For someone who has a high degree of sensitivity to public sounds, technological instruments allow them to tune in to their private music. Depending on the person, their private music can be considered as private silence if they view public music as noise pollution. The significance musica mobilis has on everybody’s soundscape is extremely surprising to me because I had no idea certain people have strong preferences for private sounds. Also, it is really interesting to see how easily one can escape from a public soundscape into their desired one through modern day technology.
