Read the following passage regarding urban acoustics and noise mitigation policies.
In the study of urban acoustics, researchers differentiate between objective noise metrics—such as decibel levels and frequency spectra—and subjective soundscape perception, which is heavily influenced by sociocultural context. While early noise mitigation policies relied almost exclusively on quantitative thresholds, contemporary urban planners emphasize 'acoustic ecology.' This paradigm posits that not all loud sounds are detrimental; for instance, the masking effect of a prominent water feature can improve the perceived acoustic quality of a public plaza despite increasing the overall decibel level. The acoustic ecology approach evaluates environments based on the congruence between the visual setting and the auditory stimuli. It explicitly rejects the notion that absolute silence is the ideal for urban spaces, arguing instead for the curation of 'sonic diversity.' However, implementing this approach faces significant hurdles. Planners struggle with the transient nature of auditory phenomena, the absence of uniform protocols for quantifying subjective acoustic experiences, and inflexible local ordinances that enforce hard decibel ceilings irrespective of the sound’s source or context.
Statement: According to the passage, the implementation of the acoustic ecology approach is hindered by the transient nature of auditory phenomena and inflexible local ordinances, but the passage does NOT suggest that a reliance on absolute silence as an ideal goal is one of the hurdles facing contemporary planners.
Cevap: Cevap