Did Paleolithic cave artists intentionally paint at resonant cave locations?

In 1988, two investigators (Iegor Reznikoff and Michel Dauvois) reported a connection between the local density of cave paintings and local sonic “resonance” in three French Paleolithic painted caves. Archaeologist Chris Scarre summarized their findings in a brief article that drew much attention (Painting by Resonance, Nature 338 [1989]: 382). Scarre wrote “Reznikoff- Dauvois theory is consistent with the likely importance of music and singing in the rituals of our early ancestors.” Reznikoff-Dauvois believed cave artists intentionally chose painting locations for their sonic resonance. They further conjectured it was the artists admiration for resonant sound that inspired their choice. This writer suggests the associations found were merely correlative, and not necessarily causal. (Crowing roosters do not cause the sun to rise.) How then can the correlation be explained? This writer hypothesizes that initially, “painterly” needs rather than sonic preferences may have influenced choice of painting location (large expanses of non-porous rock). Since non-porous rock is highly sound reflective the best cave locations for long-lasting cave paintings are “resonant.” Paintings on porous (non-resonant) rock would not persist. This is a testable hypothesis. Moreover, combining impressive art and sound could inspire singing and dance. Such sites might plausibly become ritual spaces.