Klipsch, Bloomberg and Earbuds

[thebes]

Using the subways, I routinely am subject to >100 db of high pitch noise coming from the subways. That is why I choose in ear buds versus headphones. Also I find it more comfortable in crowded areas. I think the campaign is fine to tell people the dangers. But then again take a look at Maron''s response to common sense.

Couldn't agree more, and don't even get me started on how the people;e who make things like subways and a whole lots of other stuff,get away with that type of noise pollution. However, wouldn't noise cancellers or earphones, not buds, be a better safer alternative?

Oh. Don't worry about Maron, He gets bilious from time-to-time. Otherwise he's a very cool cat.

[dtel]

Why would you want to hear the noise of all of that, cars, cabs and who knows how many people in a hurry, the Mayor can keep his city and his rules, DC was as close as I ever care to be, at least they have the Smithsonian. [Y]

[McMiRA]

That's the EXACT reason I use in ear monitors. Complete noise isolation. I was a fabricator for 15 years and still dable. the sounds of a shop are more than enough to damage hearing. Add into that years of db drag racing and sound offs and I should be on the verge of deaf. If I'm going to put in some ear plugs they might as well make some sound. Some very good sound. I use Westone um2s with 119db/ mw sensitivity. They are dual driver and can get damn loud. But they also create a very respectable soundstage. The high sensitivity means I can turn the volume down to hear my music over a grinder and conserve some battery life to boot. The blaring noises you hear from the kids around you, most of that mess is from junk headsets that are not sound isolating and output sound inside and outside the ears. Most low end earphones rely on exterior venting to create bass instead of creating the wave in the ear canal. I used shure and then some skull candys for a while and the vent on the outside was as large as the driver. Even when they weren't turned up people around me could still hear what I was listening too. With my westones even at high volume there is no sound outside the ear canal.

[Quiet_Hollow]

119db/ mw sensitivity.

I think this brings up another good plug for sensitivity. Regarding headphones (cans or earbuds), higher sensitivity equates to better battery run times in mobile gear.

I first noticed this while working out and switching out between different sets of ear buds using my trusty MuVo TX. The higher sensitivity ones allowed the player to be powered longer by a full three weeks. It got to the point where I stopped using one particular set, because I knew they'd drain out the player within 5 days.

When the source is only a single AAA battery, saving a few dB can have some big impact on power consumption.

[Jay481985]

Anyway, just don't come to New York City. Simple as that.

I have no problem with that.

Problem solved, and many reciprocate and won't go to Texas.

[Jay481985]

Next Bloomberg will legislate how loud you can pop your bubblegum...C,mon he,s a twobit dictater

Yep 1st step to becoming dictator, limit headphone spl....

2nd step to becoming dictator is limit loudness of your bubblegum.

It would be great if you can form a cohesive statement that actually has logic if you are going to call him a dictator.

There are people in the world that say's God Hates Fags. It doesn't make a difference if they scream out their lungs when they don't have a logical message to base it off of.

[Jay481985]

Perhaps the makers of MP3 players should put in output limiters? There are also volume limit restrictions parents can set in iPods.

Good ideas, that would have to be applied across all the various brands of ipod -style players. Why not step up and limit Klipsch earbuds to say 95db or 100bd? 110db rated buds are just insanely irresponsible. Lead the pack. Get whatever trade association audio builders belong to, to adopt a standard. Standards are employed across all industries to self-regulate.

To me the issue is the earbud's intrinsic design results in an ability to so, so easily do serious damage to peoples hearing.

I would adamantly oppose any legislation to limit output SPL in headphones. That's recipe to destroy safe dynamics.

Hey Doc, given the compression employed in far to much current music and the fact we are talking about MP3's, not real recorded music, hasn't the damage already been done? The dynamics, transients,spl, what have you, are already down the toilet. You're already getting slammed to death, so why not try to save a few of those little ear canal hair thingies for another day?

mp3 are fine except for the 1% listening honestly

[Jay481985]

Using the subways, I routinely am subject to >100 db of high pitch noise coming from the subways. That is why I choose in ear buds versus headphones. Also I find it more comfortable in crowded areas. I think the campaign is fine to tell people the dangers. But then again take a look at Maron''s response to common sense.

Couldn't agree more, and don't even get me started on how the people;e who make things like subways and a whole lots of other stuff,get away with that type of noise pollution. However, wouldn't noise cancellers or earphones, not buds, be a better safer alternative?

Oh. Don't worry about Maron, He gets bilious from time-to-time. Otherwise he's a very cool cat.

Wait what? Subways can be pretty quiet. We have light rails that have to horn when going through certain areas as they are so quiet that they accidentally hit people and cars. On the double decker commuter rail, when the power is switched over from DC to AC in a certain area, the a/c or heating shuts off. When it does that it becomes freakishly weird when all of a sudden you hear other passengers and people coughing and just silence. The hvac actually puts white noise to prevent people's noises from making it in the cabin. As with why the subways are freakishly noisy, it is the second subway in the world to be made and many of them use the same tunnels and same rails from that time, thus the tolerances were much less as today and allows for the train wheels and tracks to scrape and cause high pitch squeels. I don't blame the trains for a system that is over 100 years old.

As for the in ear buds, they are a safer option as they completely seal the ear preventing harsh outside noises. I figure its possible to actually wear those to a gun range as its about -20 db of protection. Earphones offer little protection and cause users to raise the volume to compensate for the ambient noise let into the ear. Headphone are not quite the easiest to wear while getting to work in the morning as they are heavier and larger and usually have too much cord. They also let a lot of noise in unless they are cup headphones.

As for Bloomberg, a Henry Ford for social engineering he is not, he's done a pretty good job. Also him being a billionaire 20 times over does help keep the political influence down a bit as he does not cater much to lobbiests or special interest groups that can donate large sums of money, because while they can donate large sums of money that you or I would consider, he will ultimately have more and not give two shlts

[Jay481985]

Why would you want to hear the noise of all of that, cars, cabs and who knows how many people in a hurry, the Mayor can keep his city and his rules, DC was as close as I ever care to be, at least they have the Smithsonian.

And NY has the Metropolitan Museum, The MoMA, the Guggenheim off the top of my head. They have Museum mile and a lot of other things.

There are not as many cars as you would think. Most of the cars are either taxi cabs or tourists. Certain area its limos or S classes but what does it much matter.

[Marvel]

He won't be mayor forever... that's the good thing. Do they have term limits?

[Jay481985]

He won't be mayor forever... that's the good thing. Do they have term limits?

Seriously why does everyone somehow hate him even though its not their mayor. And yes they have term limits.

[thebes]

I think there is some confusion here about what I'm saying. I'm not saying that earbuds employed audiophiles like us are not safe, (although if you are using them for noise cancellation you are not, not doing yourself a favor,) but I am very concerned about what they are doing to a certain segment of the population who consider them completly safe and turn them up too loud for long periods of time.

Education helps but a better designed (ie less loud) earbud or using cans would be safer, so why don't responsible manufacturers step up .to the plate and fix it.They can set industry standards of they cold fund a nationwide awareness campaign along the lines of Bloomberg's.

Crimeny, industries do this stuff all the time

Here's an article on damage to young people.

Earbuds could damage hearing

By Wendy Leopold

Turn ‘em down and turn ‘em off. That’s the advice of Dean Garstecki, a
Northwestern audiologist and professor, when it comes to using those
ever-present earbuds favored by iPod and MP3 music listeners everywhere.

In the 1980s, audiologists began cautioning lovers of loud music
about hearing loss that could potentially result from use of their
Walkman or portable compact disc players when those devices were on the
cutting edge of music listening. With iPods the hot holiday gift for
music lovers of all ages, Garstecki is encouraging safer use of the
popular music listening devices.

“We’re seeing the kind of hearing loss in younger people typically
found in aging adults. Unfortunately, the earbuds preferred by music
listeners are even more likely to cause hearing loss than the muff-type
earphones that were associated with the older devices,” Garstecki said.

Not only are earbuds placed directly into the ear, they can boost the
sound signal by as much as six to nine decibels. “That’s the difference
in intensity between the sound made by a vacuum cleaner and the sound
of a motorcycle engine,” said Garstecki, professor and chair in the
Roxelyn and Richard Pepper Department of Communication Sciences and
Disorders.

In addition to the more intense sound signal, today’s music listening
devices — with their longer battery life and their capacity to hold and
conveniently play lots of music — also encourage users to listen for
longer periods of time than did the older portable devices. That, too,
increases the potential for hearing damage, according to Garstecki.

The solution, according to Garstecki, is the 60 percent/60 minute
rule. He and other hearing specialists recommend using the MP3 devices,
including iPods, for no more than about an hour a day and at levels
below 60 percent of maximum volume.

”If music listeners are willing to turn the volume down further still
and use different headphones, they can increase the amount of time that
they can safely listen,” Garstecki added.

To avoid sustaining permanent hearing loss in the middle ranges —the
range required to hear conversation in a noisy restaurant, for example —
Garstecki recommends the use of older style, larger headphones that
rest over the ear opening.

Another option is the use of noise-canceling headphones. “Unlike
earbuds, noise-canceling headphones quiet or eliminate background noise.
That means listeners don’t feel the need to crank up the volume so high
as to damage their hearing,” Garstecki said.

[skonopa]

As for the in ear buds, they are a safer option as they completely seal the ear preventing harsh outside noises. I figure its possible to actually wear those to a gun range as its about -20 db of protection. Earphones offer little protection and cause users to raise the volume to compensate for the ambient noise let into the ear. Headphone are not quite the easiest to wear while getting to work in the morning as they are heavier and larger and usually have too much cord. They also let a lot of noise in unless they are cup headphones.

I have to agree with this. I found I much prefer a GOOD pair or earbuds or "in-ear monitors". For example, numerous times at the airport or on the plane (and for that matter, even at the gym), I see people using the stock white "iBuds" that comes with the iPhone/iPod, and they have the volume cranked all the way up on thier device to compensate for the noise, where as I am using even a relatively humble pair of Klipsch S3s and I only need to turn it up about halfway to get good sound. Of course, on the plane, I much prefer to use my Klipsch Custom-3s, which are still going strong after all these years.

I am also in the camp of vehemently disagreeing/opposing any kind of law or legislation of forcing people/device makers/earphone makers of putting large limitations on the SPL. I do agree that the device makers should add that as a OPTION that can be turned on under the "parental controls" settings. In addition, there are special SPL-limited earphones available that are marketed towards children. For me, being a full-grown adult, I am fully well aware of what high SPLs can do, so that is why I am careful with my own volume controls, but still want to be able to use high-sensitivity equipment, so I can maximum sound quality out of my gear.

Along the same lines, should car manufactuters be required to speed-limit thier vehicles to say, 85 mph, or only offer vehicles with a maximum HP of say 200? I am all for them being able to implement the OPTION of speed limiting vehicles, say before letting the teen driver use it, but don't make it a REQUIREMENT.

As for all the ranting about MP3s that I've seen on here. Granted, I am not a format snob and actually found that with the right equipment, the MP3s can actually sound pretty good. Granted, it is no "tubes-n-vinyl", but for relatively space-limited protable gear, it sure is a hell of a lot more convenient. I would rather have my 320kps MP3s tunes on an iPod than go completely without. Given my preferences, I would rather go with lossless or the actual CD on my main rig, but in the car or at the gym, could anybody really tell the difference if given a lossless or 320 kbps MP3 in such circumstances?

If anything needs to be SPL-limited, it those jackasses running around thumping thier rap crap at loud levels through my neighborhood! For those, to bad I could not simply apply a little RPG-7 or AT-4 type of noise abatement measures. [6]

[DrWho]

Perhaps the makers of MP3 players should put in output limiters? There are also volume limit restrictions parents can set in iPods.

Good ideas, that would have to be applied across all the various brands of ipod -style players. Why not step up and limit Klipsch earbuds to say 95db or 100bd? 110db rated buds are just insanely irresponsible. Lead the pack. Get whatever trade association audio builders belong to, to adopt a standard. Standards are employed across all industries to self-regulate.

To me the issue is the earbud's intrinsic design results in an ability to so, so easily do serious damage to peoples hearing.

I would adamantly oppose any legislation to limit output SPL in headphones. That's recipe to destroy safe dynamics.

Hey Doc, given the compression employed in far to much current music and the fact we are talking about MP3's, not real recorded music, hasn't the damage already been done? The dynamics, transients,spl, what have you, are already down the toilet. You're already getting slammed to death, so why not try to save a few of those little ear canal hair thingies for another day?

The music to which I prefer to listen is not overly compressed and was produced within the last decade.

Regardless, the issue here is far more complicated at a technical level and what you're proposing would even affect the quality of safe levels of compressed music. Not all headphones have the same sensitivity and impedance - both of which affect the MaxSPL. The headphone amplifier ICs on the market have voltage restrictions, so you end up with wildly varying maxSPL between different headphones.

Because the headphones and portable devices are separate, you can't limit the worst case scenario at the portable device without dramatically reducing the safe levels for everyone else using higher impedance earphones. If you try to limit the maximum output in the earphone, now you're affecting safe dynamics for non-compressed music, or you're adding distortion for everyone at lower levels.

There's also tons of research showing that listening damage is a function of both level and duration. Listening at a moderate level for several songs can cause just as much damage as a loud level for one song.

Why not address the problem at the root and take care of the knowledge of the masses instead?

[CECAA850]

He won't be mayor forever... that's the good thing. Do they have term limits?

Seriously why does everyone somehow hate him even though its not their mayor. And yes they have term limits.

Maybe they think his priorities should be elsewhere rather than concentrating on headphones and SODA .

Personally,I have no feelings toward the man one way or the other. His actions don't affect me at all.

[Mongo171]

Seriously why does everyone somehow hate him even though its not their mayor.

My Dad hates him. He lives in the Bronx. I just think the man needs a time-out in a huggy jacket while confined to a padded cell! [*-)]

[Mighty Favog]

He won't be mayor forever... that's the good thing. Do they have term limits?

Seriously why does everyone somehow hate him even though its not their mayor. And yes they have term limits.

Maybe they think his priorities should be elsewhere rather than concentrating on headphones and SODA .

.... or even giving "Plan B" morning after pills to 14-year old girls.

[CECAA850]

He won't be mayor forever... that's the good thing. Do they have term limits?

Seriously why does everyone somehow hate him even though its not their mayor. And yes they have term limits.

Maybe they think his priorities should be elsewhere rather than concentrating on headphones and SODA .

.... or even giving "Plan B" morning after pills to 14-year old girls.

From what I've read, he seems like he'd be the type of person who'd perscribe pain killers for a gash in the leg. as opposed to stiching it up.

[Jay481985]

He won't be mayor forever... that's the good thing. Do they have term limits?

Seriously why does everyone somehow hate him even though its not their mayor. And yes they have term limits.

Maybe they think his priorities should be elsewhere rather than concentrating on headphones and SODA .

.... or even giving "Plan B" morning after pills to 14-year old girls.

First plan B is not the abortion pill. It simply isn't. And second would you rather say no to the plan b and have the kid bring a unwanted baby into the world? Kids make mistakes, its even worse when parents make them keep their mistakes. This thread is now going to get banned.

[Jay481985]

He won't be mayor forever... that's the good thing. Do they have term limits?

Seriously why does everyone somehow hate him even though its not their mayor. And yes they have term limits.

Maybe they think his priorities should be elsewhere rather than concentrating on headphones and SODA .

.... or even giving "Plan B" morning after pills to 14-year old girls.

From what I've read, he seems like he'd be the type of person who'd perscribe pain killers for a gash in the leg. as opposed to stiching it up.

No he wouldn't. Pretty sure about that one. Don't know what you have been reading.