3 ms·

The article title is confusing architects with structural engineers.

• ska 8y ago
  On the other hand, some architects could stand to learn quite a bit from structural engineers...
  • jaclaz 8y ago
    >On the other hand, some architects could stand to learn quite a bit from structural engineers... ... and viceversa. As said above as I see it the real issue is the (modern) separation/specialization of those professions.
• jaclaz 8y ago
  Yep, but the issue is that in "modern times" the two professions were divided. Up to roughly the end of the 19th century (and in some cases even in the early 1900's) an architect was also a structural engineer, and a structural engineer also an architect (and BTW in the classical times the architect was also the structural engineer and the site director, in some cases even the builder/contractor). The gap between the two professions has become - in my experience - wider, and with the (needed) addition of other professional and "specialized" figures (geologists, plant engineers, etc.) each profession has become narrower in scope, to the point that sometimes it is difficult to have an architect and a structural engineer communicate properly, as they each lack a "global" vision on a project.
• oh_sigh 8y ago
  It is also confusing in the sense that it uses the term "sound engineering" with 'sound' being the 'good/sturdy' definition, whereas the whole phrase is interchangeable with a field of study within architecture(sound/acoustic engineering)
  • marssaxman 8y ago
    That threw me; I wondered all the way through when the author was finally going to get around to the part about acoustics.