Duke Spinner Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 OOOOOOhhhhhhhhhh ... look who's talkin' ....... now, you went to Tri-path ....[] i'll let you know, ......... in live performance i mostly wore " Sonic Ear Plug's " ... and , just tested last year ... I ...can Hear 15,000 Cycles ..( Puff's up Chest ) .....[] [] [] Na na Ne Na Nah ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meagain Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 I could never wear earplugs to a concert. Though want to get a pair for my husband for mowing the lawn, blowing out the gutters, etc. Yes I'm PISSED there are such lame offerings for both quiet/efficient lawn/garden tools - but we don't do much here..... Hate to change the subject, but if there's any type of ear plugs I should get that will prevent damage, but still allow some sound in for safety........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 "I ...can Hear 15,000 Cycles ..( Puff's up Chest )" It takes 15,000 of those things for you to hear them!? I just heard a single Harley roar down a road that's about an 1/8th of a mile from hear.! Just one single bike, and it was LOUD! You need a 45, single-ended triode amp to get that back into perspective, Duke. Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverSport Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 many shooting ear muffs are the same as those made for using tools...cuts out the loud damaging sounds but leaves room to hear talking (albeit much quieter) etcetera for safety...Norton, Silencio, etc... Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksonbart Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 I could never wear earplugs to a concert. Though want to get a pair for my husband for mowing the lawn, blowing out the gutters, etc. Yes I'm PISSED there are such lame offerings for both quiet/efficient lawn/garden tools - but we don't do much here..... Hate to change the subject, but if there's any type of ear plugs I should get that will prevent damage, but still allow some sound in for safety........ Well it is crazy, but perhaps try it some time next time. You will be surprised how quickly your hearing will adjust (meaning you will not percieve that your missing anything), just like it would if you didn't wear them, except you will not be doing damage to your ears. Your body/ears will adjust and its still great music. That said I will pull them out for a selected song or two. Typically its the loudness and duration that will damage your ears, well I don't care if I look lame, but I still enjoy live music but don't want to damage my hearing. I would not go to a live event that is amplified with out it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Spinner Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 I could never wear earplugs to a concert. Though want to get a pair for my husband for mowing the lawn, blowing out the gutters, etc. Yes I'm PISSED there are such lame offerings for both quiet/efficient lawn/garden tools - but we don't do much here..... Hate to change the subject, but if there's any type of ear plugs I should get that will prevent damage, but still allow some sound in for safety........ "Sonic EarPlug's "... Lis' they have a Diaphram that gradually closes up, depending on spl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Spinner Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 "I ...can Hear 15,000 Cycles ..( Puff's up Chest )" It takes 15,000 of those things for you to hear them!? I just heard a single Harley roar down a road that's about an 1/8th of a mile from hear.! Just one single bike, and it was LOUD! You need a 45, single-ended triode amp to get that back into perspective, Duke. Erik [] [] [] Glad ta see... You ... Prod me back ... Erik .....[] Feel's ... Good ... don't it ..?? [] [] [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Sorry 'bout that Duke, my lousy sense of humor got the better of me. Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 "That could all just be marketing fluff and those meters aren't really measuring anything -after all, how would you ever really know? " My brother, a musician of 40 years, asked the same question, and challenged me to prove it. I down loaded some mp3 test tones...about 10 in all at different frequencies. I ran the MP3 test tones through my amp I adjusted the volume so the output on my speakers were significant. took measurements used ohms law and determined that the meters do infact measure power output. so yeah, the meters work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 I down loaded some mp3 test tones...about 10 in all at different frequencies. I adjusted the volume so the output on my speakers were significant. took measurements used ohms law and determined that the meters do infact measure power output. so yeah, the meters work. Oh come on, man! MP3 test tones? How do you know they were recorded at the correct frequencies? Volume was significant? Thats like saying you have big hands. Measurements with what? How do you know the device was remotely accurate? Ohms law? You are kidding right? Now you are asking us to believe you can actually calculate ohms law? The meters work? Based on 4 other assumptions being correct and in light of the fact McIntosh obviously installed these meters as a marketing ploy? Get real man. The above statements were said in jest and intended to be recognized as complete [bs] I see no reason to believe the meters would underestimate the power output and therefore accept they are as accurate as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 "That could all just be marketing fluff and those meters aren't really measuring anything -after all, how would you ever really know? " My brother, a musician of 40 years, asked the same question, and challenged me to prove it. I down loaded some mp3 test tones...about 10 in all at different frequencies. I ran the MP3 test tones through my amp I adjusted the volume so the output on my speakers were significant. took measurements used ohms law and determined that the meters do infact measure power output. so yeah, the meters work. A single frequency is not music. Music can jump up and down quickly for just a flash of a second and those meters can not track that kind of transient. Yes the meters are probably pretty accurate at steady state average power usage of music and portray at least some of the transient usage but no way in hell can they track the real usage for brief transients. But regardless believe what you want.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 Mark Deneen is right about all things audio. Uh, oh. I can smell accusations of conspiracy. Run for cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coytee Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 Hate to change the subject, but if there's any type of ear plugs I should get that will prevent damage, but still allow some sound in for safety........ Meagain, go check these out http://www.pro-ears.com/moreinfo.htm#dimension1 I've got the Dimension 2's so they have an input jack for my cd player. The thing about these (and they're not cheap), there's a microphone inside the headseats that you can turn on. When on, the mic lets "vocal ranges" through the muffs but cuts out other stuff. The reality is, I can be on my backhoe (big loud) with these on and hear my wife BETTER than I can hear her with them off. Of course, I must have them turned on first... hmm... It took her a while to finally "get" that I really WAS listening to her while wearing them. They do a great job of muffling everything yet when turned on, let the vocal range through to them (variable volume) AND you can plug your cd player into the 2's. They are comfortable enough that I'll find myself not only wearing them when I'm working around the house but I'll LEAVE them on when I get a coke or move the car (so I can put backhoe in driveway)... I'd strongly suggest anyone give them a look Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 Mark Deneen is right about all things audio. Uh, oh. I can smell accusations of conspiracy. Run for cover. No Conspricy at all, I say 100% hogwash..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Peak reading meter circuits are very common. The ones on my MC2125 were very sophisticated and very accurate. Many good peak meters were even made in the 60s using "magic eye" tubes like 6EM80s and so on. Today, most peak reading circuits would use LEDs, some ICs and a few diodes. The "hold" period - from a few milliseconds to several seconds - can be adjusted to any value by changing usually just one capacitor. There's nothing in the audio band of music that wouldn't be "seen" by these meters. If some transient were for some unexplained reason, too short to be seen by the peak meter, they would likewise be too short to be played by the amplifier in question as the core of the meter is nothing other than a small amplifier and a hold "bucket." "A primary concern of using meters to accurately show levels of music was the rise time. This involved not only the meter capabilities, but also the actual rise time of the musical instruments themselves. It brought up the fundamental question of whether a 20,000Hz square wave could exist and be propagated in air without being differentiated. Gordon Gow explained that although several experiments with a starting pistol showed varied results, the fastest rise time was found by striking two pins together. To exhibit rise times like this, the mass of an ordinary meter movement was too high to accurately show peaks. The MC2505 design provided driving circuitry that made the meter movement follow the fast rising waveforms to an accuracy of over 90%. By following the waveform, however, the meter movement could then be too fast for the eye to follow. Additional circuits made the peaks time-stretched, controlling the needle movement to be within the persistence of vision for the human eye. Later, my research showed that further improvements were still needed for the meters." -- Roger Russell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Dean, You are on the money today. Now, my question. He says they could follow the fast rising waveforms to an acuracy over 90% but they were too fast for the eye to follow. The description speakerfritz posted defined a mode which didn't follow the waveforms (hence the above statement) but rather just moved to the highest db level seen and remained there until another peak superceded it. I would assume then that those meters are reading the peaks with at least 90% accuracy and probably quite higher. Any further insight on your part? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 "MP3 test tones? How do you know they were recorded at the correct frequencies?" A tuning fork, how else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted June 9, 2007 Share Posted June 9, 2007 At 11.7W peak the average power is 730mW At 14.3W peak the average power is 890mW. oh I like that......I could only be using 890mw if we talk average power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.