 Recently Kulvicki (2017: 91) has proposed a more inclusive view of what sounds are. He admits that identifying sounds with the mere vibratory dispositions of objects does not seem to capture the full range of the auditory experience. Therefore, among sounds he includes also aspects of events and the contexts in which those aspects are heard, and distinguishes between non-perspectival and perspectival qualities. The former are the dispositions of objects to vibrate in response to being mechanically stimulated but also happenings, and the second are “abstractions over features of objects, events, and environs” (2017: 87). Both qualities are taken to be sounds, which are a “mongrel” category. Kulvicki explains that the perspectival qualities are “abstraction over intrinsic and relational features of ordinary objects, environments, and range events in which they participate” (2017: 90). That is, concerning some aspects things sound in a way and, concerning other aspects, they sound differently, depending on the perspective. When we imitate the voice of someone, the reproduction of her voice is similar to the original in some respects but is different in others. Within Kulvicki’s view, the worry is that sounds seem to be different kinds of things, very distant and often in opposition with each other (features of objects but also happenings, perspectival properties but also non-perspectival qualities). Rather than claiming that these are different ways of characterizing sounds, Kulvicki is exhaustively telling us the different things we can hear, without explaining in full what sounds are.