New Everton Stadium

[BNJ1878]

If we are in a relegation battle then it’s safe to say the Goodison edge isn’t there anyway.

10 home defeats last season.

Losing consecutive home matches to the teams sat at bottom of the league.

The 'Goodison edge' is a bit of a myth we're clinging onto. (probably because our away form is diabolical)

 

[Tom Hughes]

In what sense and to what extent? As a passing interest or are you professionally qualified?

Reason I ask is that in all I've read about the new stadium, everything suggests that it has been designed to maximise crowd noise and the consultants have carried out extensive acoustic modelling which included the performance/specification for the roof.

There were surveys done of the noise generated at GP and this used as a benchmark for BM.

However, you have suggested multiple times that it will be poor acoustically.

I studied stadium design at University over 20yrs ago and have been involved in a couple of stadium projects as a design engineer. I've also worked on several other projects involving acoustic engineers who are normally more responsible for sound insulation and dampening rather than crowd noise amplification. However, I'm mainly speaking from experience of standing/sitting in hundreds of stands in the UK and worldwide.

Almost every new stadium design comes with mention or assurances of great acoustic design for atmosphere etc. Most of it is relatively token or slightly misguiding tbh. For instance Wembley and the Emirates were both modelled for acoustics and I don't think anyone would say either is particularly great for football atmosphere. The old Wembley was far superior for football fans to generate an atmosphere.... even with a massive running track. The NWHL was extensively modelled similarly (there are several articles on it), but hasn't overly impressed (yet) in that respect.... though better than the Emirates.

It's important to distinguish between designing for whole stadium sound retention (or whole stadium atmosphere) and designing for individual stand atmosphere enhancement, because there is a slight contradiction in there. The basic principles are fairly simple and well established for both approaches without the need to look at the intricacies of modelling and reverberation times etc.

If you're looking at designing a "kop"-like end terrace for your most vociferous fans, for them then to generate the bulk of the atmosphere... the basic template is the original "Kop" at Anfield or to make it more palatable for us: the yellow wall (south tribune at Dortmund. That is, as many rows as possible with a shed type roof (normally downward sloping) to retain the noise by getting maximum reflective catchment, thus spreading chants across the whole end, firstly prompting full take-up of that chant/song and ultimately projection out onto the pitch by the largest number of people possible (All of which is the opposite at the North stand). In so doing, prompting the rest of the ground to join in etc.

Conversely, if you are looking at noise retention of the whole stadium, treating it as a uniform homogeneous mass, where everyone is equally vociferous and equally responsible for generating an atmosphere.... then you might simply put a large reflective dome over the top (with an aperture for light and rain above the pitch). As an example for instance, have you ever walked across the floor of the domed central library in town and heard every footstep echo off the ceiling from every angle? The Principality stadium or Ajax arena illustrate this effect.

The barrel roof is essentially a 2 dimensional translation of that dome effect. Of course the barrel was Meis' initial sketched concept idea working around the principle of a rolling wave on the shoreside. The acoustic effect is essentially coincidental and secondary. A happy coincidence. Acoustically, the format is not dissimilar to GP. High roof and relatively close proximity to pitch. Simon Inglis the stadium architecture writer and co-author of the green guide described GP as being revered for its atmosphere on the special occasion. I've always thought that was a slightly thinly veiled criticism. As others have described GP as being either a morgue or a seething bearpit dependent on the opposition/occasion. Jack Charlton said GP was the nastiest atmosphere of any ground he'd played at..... making reference to having terraces on all sides with the fans on top of you. It's often forgotten now, but historically the greater noise used to come from the old Goodison Rd enclosure that held over 20k on its own, with Goodison more famed for its roar than singing of elaborate songs.

Essentially, acoustics of stands is generally about how you mass fans beneath a roof. The proximity to and geometry of that roof. It may also be about prioritising sections for the most vociferous etc. The architects of Anfield's new stands have also continually stated that the roof design is all about promoting a good atmosphere. Funneling sound like a megaphone down onto the pitch. So you have one set of architects advocating up turned rooves and others proclaiming the virtues of the downturned roof..... both with acoustic engineers modelling to back them up.

 

[Tom Hughes]

But they didn't design the North stand to have a specific "acoustic catchment" or at least we weren't told that stand was going to be specific when it came to generating noise.

That stand was designed due to the limited space on that side of the land.

You've said it multiple times with the "well that stands capacity is quite deceiving"....guess what, it's not deceiving at all if that's what it is. No one has said the North Stand holds 15k when it doesn't. No one has said the North stand will be the greatest acoustically sounding stand ever.

It doesn't matter if the Street End has more rows, no one asked if it had more rows, no one asked if the corner was included. The capacity of each stand is their and available for all people to check out.

I'm not sure what your point is.
A few people have mentioned the use of acoustics in stadium design. This end has little or no acoustic enhancement in design terms.

I mentioned the number of rows because that is obviously one of the determining factors for capacity and acoustic catchment. In both respects, the North stand is underwhelming.

 

[Gardocki]

The North Stand Lower and upper holds a total of 10,550 (which includes away section)

The Park End holds 6k
The Upper and Lower Gwladys Street End holds 10,600

It's not a massive stand by any stretch, but it isn't small either. I like it, I think the glass background will look quite cool

Same. I think it adds character. I also love the image it will give to drone cameras outside being able to look into the stadium for a night game through the big window. Really unique. You can already see that in Mr. Drone's recent fly past from the north.

 

[muckers]

I studied stadium design at University over 20yrs ago and have been involved in a couple of stadium projects as a design engineer. I've also worked on several other projects involving acoustic engineers who are normally more responsible for sound insulation and dampening rather than crowd noise amplification. However, I'm mainly speaking from experience of standing/sitting in hundreds of stands in the UK and worldwide.

Almost every new stadium design comes with mention or assurances of great acoustic design for atmosphere etc. Most of it is relatively token or slightly misguiding tbh. For instance Wembley and the Emirates were both modelled for acoustics and I don't think anyone would say either is particularly great for football atmosphere. The old Wembley was far superior for football fans to generate an atmosphere.... even with a massive running track. The NWHL was extensively modelled similarly (there are several articles on it), but hasn't overly impressed (yet) in that respect.... though better than the Emirates.

It's important to distinguish between designing for whole stadium sound retention (or whole stadium atmosphere) and designing for individual stand atmosphere enhancement, because there is a slight contradiction in there. The basic principles are fairly simple and well established for both approaches without the need to look at the intricacies of modelling and reverberation times etc.

If you're looking at designing a "kop"-like end terrace for your most vociferous fans, for them then to generate the bulk of the atmosphere... the basic template is the original "Kop" at Anfield or to make it more palatable for us: the yellow wall (south tribune at Dortmund. That is, as many rows as possible with a shed type roof (normally downward sloping) to retain the noise by getting maximum reflective catchment, thus spreading chants across the whole end, firstly prompting full take-up of that chant/song and ultimately projection out onto the pitch by the largest number of people possible (All of which is the opposite at the North stand). In so doing, prompting the rest of the ground to join in etc.

Conversely, if you are looking at noise retention of the whole stadium, treating it as a uniform homogeneous mass, where everyone is equally vociferous and equally responsible for generating an atmosphere.... then you might simply put a large reflective dome over the top (with an aperture for light and rain above the pitch). As an example for instance, have you ever walked across the floor of the domed central library in town and heard every footstep echo off the ceiling from every angle? The Principality stadium or Ajax arena illustrate this effect.

The barrel roof is essentially a 2 dimensional translation of that dome effect. Of course the barrel was Meis' initial sketched concept idea working around the principle of a rolling wave on the shoreside. The acoustic effect is essentially coincidental and secondary. A happy coincidence. Acoustically, the format is not dissimilar to GP. High roof and relatively close proximity to pitch. Simon Inglis the stadium architecture writer and co-author of the green guide described GP as being revered for its atmosphere on the special occasion. I've always thought that was a slightly thinly veiled criticism. As others have described GP as being either a morgue or a seething bearpit dependent on the opposition/occasion. Jack Charlton said GP was the nastiest atmosphere of any ground he'd played at..... making reference to having terraces on all sides with the fans on top of you. It's often forgotten now, but historically the greater noise used to come from the old Goodison Rd enclosure that held over 20k on its own, with Goodison more famed for its roar than singing of elaborate songs.

Essentially, acoustics of stands is generally about how you mass fans beneath a roof. The proximity to and geometry of that roof. It may also be about prioritising sections for the most vociferous etc. The architects of Anfield's new stands have also continually stated that the roof design is all about promoting a good atmosphere. Funneling sound like a megaphone down onto the pitch. So you have one set of architects advocating up turned rooves and others proclaiming the virtues of the downturned roof..... both with acoustic engineers modelling to back them up.

I’ve no idea why the club spent money getting an architect with a long track record of designing buildings/stadiums all over the world when we could’ve just got Tom in.

More money wasted!

 

[Tom Hughes]

I’ve no idea why the club spent money getting an architect with a long track record of designing buildings/stadiums all over the world when we could’ve just got Tom in.

More money wasted!

What has that got to do with anything I've actually written? Populous/HOK have probably designed more stadia than the rest put together.... does that mean that the Emirates is above all criticism? No, of course not!

Why have a discussion thread on any issue? The club is obviously so well run, who are we to discuss/criticise?

 

[navidson]

I studied stadium design at University over 20yrs ago and have been involved in a couple of stadium projects as a design engineer. I've also worked on several other projects involving acoustic engineers who are normally more responsible for sound insulation and dampening rather than crowd noise amplification. However, I'm mainly speaking from experience of standing/sitting in hundreds of stands in the UK and worldwide.

Almost every new stadium design comes with mention or assurances of great acoustic design for atmosphere etc. Most of it is relatively token or slightly misguiding tbh. For instance Wembley and the Emirates were both modelled for acoustics and I don't think anyone would say either is particularly great for football atmosphere. The old Wembley was far superior for football fans to generate an atmosphere.... even with a massive running track. The NWHL was extensively modelled similarly (there are several articles on it), but hasn't overly impressed (yet) in that respect.... though better than the Emirates.

It's important to distinguish between designing for whole stadium sound retention (or whole stadium atmosphere) and designing for individual stand atmosphere enhancement, because there is a slight contradiction in there. The basic principles are fairly simple and well established for both approaches without the need to look at the intricacies of modelling and reverberation times etc.

If you're looking at designing a "kop"-like end terrace for your most vociferous fans, for them then to generate the bulk of the atmosphere... the basic template is the original "Kop" at Anfield or to make it more palatable for us: the yellow wall (south tribune at Dortmund. That is, as many rows as possible with a shed type roof (normally downward sloping) to retain the noise by getting maximum reflective catchment, thus spreading chants across the whole end, firstly prompting full take-up of that chant/song and ultimately projection out onto the pitch by the largest number of people possible (All of which is the opposite at the North stand). In so doing, prompting the rest of the ground to join in etc.

Conversely, if you are looking at noise retention of the whole stadium, treating it as a uniform homogeneous mass, where everyone is equally vociferous and equally responsible for generating an atmosphere.... then you might simply put a large reflective dome over the top (with an aperture for light and rain above the pitch). As an example for instance, have you ever walked across the floor of the domed central library in town and heard every footstep echo off the ceiling from every angle? The Principality stadium or Ajax arena illustrate this effect.

The barrel roof is essentially a 2 dimensional translation of that dome effect. Of course the barrel was Meis' initial sketched concept idea working around the principle of a rolling wave on the shoreside. The acoustic effect is essentially coincidental and secondary. A happy coincidence. Acoustically, the format is not dissimilar to GP. High roof and relatively close proximity to pitch. Simon Inglis the stadium architecture writer and co-author of the green guide described GP as being revered for its atmosphere on the special occasion. I've always thought that was a slightly thinly veiled criticism. As others have described GP as being either a morgue or a seething bearpit dependent on the opposition/occasion. Jack Charlton said GP was the nastiest atmosphere of any ground he'd played at..... making reference to having terraces on all sides with the fans on top of you. It's often forgotten now, but historically the greater noise used to come from the old Goodison Rd enclosure that held over 20k on its own, with Goodison more famed for its roar than singing of elaborate songs.

Essentially, acoustics of stands is generally about how you mass fans beneath a roof. The proximity to and geometry of that roof. It may also be about prioritising sections for the most vociferous etc. The architects of Anfield's new stands have also continually stated that the roof design is all about promoting a good atmosphere. Funneling sound like a megaphone down onto the pitch. So you have one set of architects advocating up turned rooves and others proclaiming the virtues of the downturned roof..... both with acoustic engineers modelling to back them up.

Good read that @Tom Hughes

 

[Dixie1sixty]

The discussion was about our smaller end stand. Someone else said they were disappointed with it.

I was merely stating the facts.... feel free to dispute them.

The reference to the Anfield Rd end was simply illustrative.....

Course it is.

 

[Dixie1sixty]

What has that got to do with anything I've actually written? Populous/HOK have probably designed more stadia than the rest put together.... does that mean that the Emirates is above all criticism? No, of course not!

Why have a discussion thread on any issue? The club is obviously so well run, who are we to discuss/criticise?

Well I think you're ignoring the fact that this stadium is literally the only positive thing in relation to Everton and without inside knowledge of the project, you seen to be pooh-poohing it at every opportunity.

 

[Chewbacca]

The noise will be fantastic on the usual occurrences

1. We’re winning
2. We’ve had someone unfairly sent off

Goodison is pretty quiet in general play

 

[Jacko93]

In what sense and to what extent? As a passing interest or are you professionally qualified?

Reason I ask is that in all I've read about the new stadium, everything suggests that it has been designed to maximise crowd noise and the consultants have carried out extensive acoustic modelling which included the performance/specification for the roof.

There were surveys done of the noise generated at GP and this used as a benchmark for BM.

However, you have suggested multiple times that it will be poor acoustically.

The sound that was recorded to be used as the basis upon which the modelling was made, was recorded within the lower gwladys when Oumar Niasse scored his second, and the ultimate winner against Bournemouth.

 

[hallamblue]

I studied stadium design at University over 20yrs ago and have been involved in a couple of stadium projects as a design engineer. I've also worked on several other projects involving acoustic engineers who are normally more responsible for sound insulation and dampening rather than crowd noise amplification. However, I'm mainly speaking from experience of standing/sitting in hundreds of stands in the UK and worldwide.

Almost every new stadium design comes with mention or assurances of great acoustic design for atmosphere etc. Most of it is relatively token or slightly misguiding tbh. For instance Wembley and the Emirates were both modelled for acoustics and I don't think anyone would say either is particularly great for football atmosphere. The old Wembley was far superior for football fans to generate an atmosphere.... even with a massive running track. The NWHL was extensively modelled similarly (there are several articles on it), but hasn't overly impressed (yet) in that respect.... though better than the Emirates.

It's important to distinguish between designing for whole stadium sound retention (or whole stadium atmosphere) and designing for individual stand atmosphere enhancement, because there is a slight contradiction in there. The basic principles are fairly simple and well established for both approaches without the need to look at the intricacies of modelling and reverberation times etc.

If you're looking at designing a "kop"-like end terrace for your most vociferous fans, for them then to generate the bulk of the atmosphere... the basic template is the original "Kop" at Anfield or to make it more palatable for us: the yellow wall (south tribune at Dortmund. That is, as many rows as possible with a shed type roof (normally downward sloping) to retain the noise by getting maximum reflective catchment, thus spreading chants across the whole end, firstly prompting full take-up of that chant/song and ultimately projection out onto the pitch by the largest number of people possible (All of which is the opposite at the North stand). In so doing, prompting the rest of the ground to join in etc.

Conversely, if you are looking at noise retention of the whole stadium, treating it as a uniform homogeneous mass, where everyone is equally vociferous and equally responsible for generating an atmosphere.... then you might simply put a large reflective dome over the top (with an aperture for light and rain above the pitch). As an example for instance, have you ever walked across the floor of the domed central library in town and heard every footstep echo off the ceiling from every angle? The Principality stadium or Ajax arena illustrate this effect.

The barrel roof is essentially a 2 dimensional translation of that dome effect. Of course the barrel was Meis' initial sketched concept idea working around the principle of a rolling wave on the shoreside. The acoustic effect is essentially coincidental and secondary. A happy coincidence. Acoustically, the format is not dissimilar to GP. High roof and relatively close proximity to pitch. Simon Inglis the stadium architecture writer and co-author of the green guide described GP as being revered for its atmosphere on the special occasion. I've always thought that was a slightly thinly veiled criticism. As others have described GP as being either a morgue or a seething bearpit dependent on the opposition/occasion. Jack Charlton said GP was the nastiest atmosphere of any ground he'd played at..... making reference to having terraces on all sides with the fans on top of you. It's often forgotten now, but historically the greater noise used to come from the old Goodison Rd enclosure that held over 20k on its own, with Goodison more famed for its roar than singing of elaborate songs.

Essentially, acoustics of stands is generally about how you mass fans beneath a roof. The proximity to and geometry of that roof. It may also be about prioritising sections for the most vociferous etc. The architects of Anfield's new stands have also continually stated that the roof design is all about promoting a good atmosphere. Funneling sound like a megaphone down onto the pitch. So you have one set of architects advocating up turned rooves and others proclaiming the virtues of the downturned roof..... both with acoustic engineers modelling to back them up.

I'm getting visions of the amplified sounds of people eating prawn sandwiches being all you can hear when the rs are at home.

 

[muckers]

The sound that was recorded to be used as the basis upon which the modelling was made, was recorded within the lower gwladys when Oumar Niasse scored his second, and the ultimate winner against Bournemouth.

That’s very interesting.

So, acoustic engineers took that sound and worked with Meis so we’d end up with a design/materials that will will help capture and amplify the sound?

 

[Mrtallywacker]

Never mind the acoustics, just score some bleeding goals Everton and we'll make the noise.

God bless.

 

[Blue peter]

The sound that was recorded to be used as the basis upon which the modelling was made, was recorded within the lower gwladys when Oumar Niasse scored his second, and the ultimate winner against Bournemouth.

Yeah but those decibels were added to by unbelievable laughter!! It’s not representative.