This site explores the acoustics, sounds and music of Stonehenge.
Who would have thought that one of the most studied archaeological sites in the UK would still have secrets hidden in plain view? However most previous studies of Stonehenge focused on looking at the site, rather than listening to it.
Music technologist and composer Dr Rupert Till started to ponder the likely acoustic effects of Stonehenge after finding a pilot study on the subject. He came up with the theory that the famous ring of stone could have sung like a crystal wine glass with a wet finger rubbing the rim, stimulated in this case by percussion played in time to the echoes of the space.
Thomas Hardy had hinted at this in 1891 in his novel Tess of the D’Urbavilles. Reading carefully between the lines with an acoustician’s ear, one can find him discussing various acoustic effects. Further research turned up an interview with the author in which he states that ‘if a gale of wind is blowing, the strange musical hum emitted by Stonehenge can never be forgotten’.
Mathematical acoustic analysis of Stonehenge’s Archaeological plans was followed by the acoustic analysis of a digital model of Stonehenge using software designed for architects’ use. The results of this analysis exceeded all expectations. The final stage of Stonehenge had acoustic figures that were as good as premier concert halls, and was perfectly suited to loud rhythmic music, much like a rock concert venue.
This work led to a visit to a full size concrete reproduction of Stonehenge in the USA, with acoustics expert Dr. Bruno Fazenda and Dr. Till flying to the Maryhill Monument in Washington State to use it as a model to carry out acoustic field measurements and search for evidence of acoustic features. Here it was possible to make the whole space resonate using a simple percussion rhythm, made by reconstructions of Neolithic instruments, and tuned to the space. Strange acoustic effects appeared in the space as if the stones themselves were singing. Dr. Fazenda has been a key research partner in the project, providing a acoustic and scientific grounding to the project.
The Maryhill trip led to 50,000 internet articles on the research, in turn leading to a History Channel Documentary in the MysteryQuest series (currently in post-production), and visits to Stonehenge itself, where echo patterns were found to support the theories.
The project has suggested where people might have stood at Stonehenge, the sort of instruments possibly used, what kind of sounds could have been made and how fast people might have played. It has also allowed tentative steps towards suggesting that the music may have acted to entrain the body, encourage Alpha rhythms in the brain, and help achieve altered states of trance-like consciousness.
Few specifics are known about the music, sound and ritual of prehistoric Britain, and any information that this project can uncover is significant. Stone circles are an enigmatic feature of British prehistory, and the hope is that understanding more about our past is on way of further understanding our present.
This work has led on to Dr. Till leading an AHRC/EPSRC research cluster focused on the acoustics and music of prehistory, a large grant application for further work on other prehistoric sites, collaboration on a TSB scheme to build an outdoor performance venue with similar acoustics and other research opportunities.
[Please note that this is an ongoing project and some of the results are preliminary. Any thoughts or feedback are more than welcome.]
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 9, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Casey Durant
the Maryhill Stonehenge is actually not in Oregon at all. It’s in Washington. The border between Oregon and Washington in that particular are actually lies in the middle of the Columbia River. Stonehenge is clearly on the Washington side. I reside in Goldendale, WA which is approximately 10 miles from the Maryhill Stonehenge!
July 29, 2010 at 3:53 pm
bfazenda
Casey, you are quite right. Maryhill Stonehenge is very close to the border but on the Washington side of the river. Where did you see stated that it is in Oregon? You are lucky to live in such a beautiful part of the world.
March 17, 2010 at 10:21 pm
V
Interesting
stonehenge captivated my imagination too.
Good luck with your project.
V.
September 12, 2011 at 1:48 pm
Greywolf
As a visitor to both Stonehenge UK and Stonehenge USA (Maryhill), I’m aware of the differences between the two as well as the obvious similarities. Maryhill is made from concrete blocks, not sarsen and, where the Stonehenge sarsens are irregular in size and shape, the Maryhill stones are much more uniform. Plus, of course, the Maryhill site is located in a raised position on the side of a vast river valley while Stonehenge UK is in the centre of a large, more-or-less flat plain. These differences must make a difference to the acoustics and I’d be interested to know what allowances were made for them in using Maryhill to acoustically map Stonehenge.
At Stonehenge UK, I’ve been hugely impressed by the acoustics even in its current ruined state, while I found ‘awakening’ the resonances of Maryhill much more difficult, assuming this to be partly due to the differing acoustic properties of concrete and sarsen.
September 12, 2011 at 2:34 pm
Greywolf
OK, most of my questions answered on your ‘Maryhill’ page…
July 20, 2012 at 5:21 pm
Michael Bormann
Cool sounds man!