Considering the effects of noise implies that “somebody” is affected by noise. If the noise itself is not problematic regarding its measurement (by physics), the question is less clear regarding WHO is concerned by noise? Humans, animals? Asking such a question entails some other ones: Is any living system similarly affected by noise? Generally as an organism? Or differentially as “subjects”? What scientific domains are concerned with such studies? We would address these questions from our experience and knowledge on soundscapes. Starting from psychophysics that remains within the “endemic antinomy of a world‐less subject confronting a thought‐less object: the antique dualism of mind and matter” [Shalins (1976)], we will consider the diversity of subjects (animal as well as human “experts” of different types, acousticians, urban planners, politicians, and inhabitants) to propose an alternative conception we name “semiophysics”: it leads to reconsider the concepts of information versus meaning, as well as from a methodological point of view, the concepts of affordance versus Umwelt. Coupling field research and experimental work by accounting for meanings as relationships given to the world by the different subjects calls then for an ecological validity of laboratory investigations.