Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Hi,
so, some customers are asking for earplugs at a live event. (sometimes including children) As sound engineer, I feel it is my duty to do what I can and provide them when requested. What devices work well at reasonable cost? (I am in the UK, which is no longer part of Europe, unfortunately) Cheers, Gareth. |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Gareth Magennis wrote:
so, some customers are asking for earplugs at a live event. (sometimes including children) As sound engineer, I feel it is my duty to do what I can and provide them when requested. You get two choices, the cylindrical foam ones and the bullet-shaped foam ones. I think the bullet-shaped ones are better but some people disagree so I keep a bag of each. Both of them have 20dB or so reduction and aren't really very flat, but are flat enough. I get both kinds from Grainger, a big industrial supplier, and they are a few pennies each. I think the EAR brand is what they last had. You could try earplug-store.co.uk, but whatever you do, don't forget to bill the customer for them! Never pass up an opportunity to bill the customer! You can get much higher quality earplugs, but they won't be pennies each and you won't want to give them out. But if you're mixing at high levels you might consider getting some custom-molded Etymotic ones. I would not be able to survive steel bands without them. I don't know about smaller ones for children. That might be a good plan too. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 30/03/2017 11:57 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote: so, some customers are asking for earplugs at a live event. (sometimes including children) As sound engineer, I feel it is my duty to do what I can and provide them when requested. You get two choices, the cylindrical foam ones and the bullet-shaped foam ones. I think the bullet-shaped ones are better but some people disagree so I keep a bag of each. Both of them have 20dB or so reduction and aren't really very flat, but are flat enough. I get both kinds from Grainger, a big industrial supplier, and they are a few pennies each. I think the EAR brand is what they last had. You could try earplug-store.co.uk, but whatever you do, don't forget to bill the customer for them! Never pass up an opportunity to bill the customer! You can get much higher quality earplugs, but they won't be pennies each and you won't want to give them out. But if you're mixing at high levels you might consider getting some custom-molded Etymotic ones. I would not be able to survive steel bands without them. I don't know about smaller ones for children. That might be a good plan too. --scott The Etymotic type custom-moulded ones are great (with a range of value attenuation 'capsules' available), but a pain to get in-and-out frequently, even with KY. I often use (for myself) the EAR ones with the the silicone flanges that come with a little black container' - much more covenient for frequent in-and-out. But for giving out, the simple foam ones for sure. But if people had a clue they'd bring their own to such an event. However NEVER use a screwed up bus ticket even in an emergency. I needled to go to the doc to get one removed after a distressingly loud pub gig I went to unprepared once ;-0 geoff |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
gareth magennis wrote: "Hi,
so, some customers are asking for earplugs at a live event. (sometimes including children) As sound engineer, I feel it is my duty to do what I can and provide them when requested. What devices work well at reasonable cost? (I am in the UK, which is no longer part of Europe, unfortunately) Cheers, Gareth. " Ear plugs do not address the root cause of the problem: The show is TOO LOUD. As the engineer, you should explain to your clients(the promoters, the organization hosting the event, the band itself, etc.) in a tactful way that the sound is too loud for some of the paying customers. If, THEY, in the first place, cannot grasp the concept of 'reasonably loud' for a given event, then it is up to you to take appropriate measures. The clients may not have asked it to be at a certain volume; they simply don't get what is reasonable and what is not. If they do ask you to really 'crank it up' ahead of time, or keep asking you to make louder during show, then it is your duty to explain the consequences: that customers are complaining and are starting to demand ear plugs or other protection. The need to wear ear plugs at an event where the volume can be controlled indicates something is wrong. This is not Nascar, or an indoor monster truck event or airshow, where the engines cannot simply be turned down. It is a concert or musical where the sound is controllable. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 6:36:41 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote:
Hi, so, some customers are asking for earplugs at a live event. (sometimes including children) As sound engineer, I feel it is my duty to do what I can and provide them when requested. What devices work well at reasonable cost? (I am in the UK, which is no longer part of Europe, unfortunately) Cheers, Gareth. I bought a cheap pair, maybe $10 (USD), Wal-Mart, JVC, "Gummy". Sounds good to my ears. Jack |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 11:20:08 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 6:36:41 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: Hi, so, some customers are asking for earplugs at a live event. (sometimes including children) As sound engineer, I feel it is my duty to do what I can and provide them when requested. Interesting and I agree, I tend to wear earplugs because the mids and highs are too loud, sometimes painfully loud, but the bass is fine. So the plugs work well because they attenuate the mids and highs and leave the bass alone. I would not mind if the mix was adjusted to keep the bass very loud but cut down the mids and highs. The promoters might accept that, I'm pretty sure the audience would. Then w could listen without the ear plugs. |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 31/03/2017 7:50 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? geoff |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff
wrote: On 31/03/2017 7:50 AM, Don Pearce wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Don Pearce wrote:
But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png What you do is you spend time listening to live sounds, so you know what live sounds should sound like _through your ears_ and you can mix things to sound like that. These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I wouldn't trust anything above 4kc made with any standard headphones, because tiny changes in headphone placement can make enormous differences in the measurement. If the measurements were made with swept sines you'd be able to see the comb filtering effects from the headphones, but since they are made only with a few discrete tones, where those tones fall on the comb makes a huge difference in accuracy. The audiologists will use headphones designed for careful positioning which gives you accuracy up to 8kc. Beyond that... you just have to use your ears... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 3:14:52 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 31/03/2017 4:20 AM, wrote: I bought a cheap pair, maybe $10 (USD), Wal-Mart, JVC, "Gummy". Sounds good to my ears. So ineffective at 3000 cycles then. In the band which is most painful.... Yes, relatively good ones can be not expensive. geoff My plan is to induce tinnitus in every person on earth, then I will excel! Jack |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 30 Mar 2017 17:01:32 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Don Pearce wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png What you do is you spend time listening to live sounds, so you know what live sounds should sound like _through your ears_ and you can mix things to sound like that. These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I wouldn't trust anything above 4kc made with any standard headphones, because tiny changes in headphone placement can make enormous differences in the measurement. If the measurements were made with swept sines you'd be able to see the comb filtering effects from the headphones, but since they are made only with a few discrete tones, where those tones fall on the comb makes a huge difference in accuracy. The audiologists will use headphones designed for careful positioning which gives you accuracy up to 8kc. Beyond that... you just have to use your ears... --scott Tada! The measurements were not actually made with discrete tones, but narrowband noise - at 10kHz it was about 100Hz wide. I was aware of the problem with tones, and I've done my best to counter it. Here, the spectrum of the 5k tone http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/5ktone.png So no, maybe not audiology-accurate, but I totally believe the loss above 5kHz. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Trevor. |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote:
On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Trevor. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Trevor. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. d Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Don Pearce wrote: "Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is
SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense---" -To the VAST MAJORITY of people looking at it, Don. Looked just fine to me. Why anyone would reverse the axes and plot it the other way defies logic and common sense! |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Don Pearce wrote: "Does this make more sense? "
Ok - now that looks just like a typical audiogram from an audiologist's exam. NOW I get what geoff meant by "upside down". |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Gareth Magennis wrote:
My live EQ is Anti Jack. There is A LOT of 3.15kHz taken out, and a reasonable amount either side. This is usually a function of using PA speakers with a presence boost combined with microphones (like the SM57) that have a presence boost. All that together in a room means you often get way too much exaggeration in that region. This is where a lot of my obsession with flat microphones like the 441 comes from. 50Hz is boosted, 40Hz also but not as much, or you will upset the management. 80Hz cut gets rid of a lot of room boom. 125Hz boosted a little, gives a lot of friendly warmth. In small clubs, there are often big room modes in the 125 Hz range, sometimes a little higher or lower. So I find myself often pulling out around there. This means you can be in the room for 8 hours without any ear fatigue, and it sounds like a good hi-fi used to sound, not some blaring club system trying to deafen you for some unknown reason. I think the key to preventing ear fatigue is a combination of reasonable levels, low distortion, and some degree of time alignment. Rooms that are too live and have stuff coming back in all directions delayed cause issues with clarity and intelligibility that can't be fixed, and attempts to boost in the presence region to fix them just cause fatigue. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Don Pearce wrote:
So no, maybe not audiology-accurate, but I totally believe the loss above 5kHz. It's believable, but is it quantified accurately? Get tested! Go to the AES show in the fall and get a free test if nothing else. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 31 Mar 2017 09:07:08 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Don Pearce wrote: So no, maybe not audiology-accurate, but I totally believe the loss above 5kHz. It's believable, but is it quantified accurately? Get tested! Go to the AES show in the fall and get a free test if nothing else. --scott Too far for me. It may not be absolutely accurate, but I think it is telling me what I need to know. I've since overlaid Fletcher-Munson 0db curve on it (no, I won't bore you with more plots) and my 2001 curve is within a half dozen dB from 100 to 10k. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 3/31/2017 9:07 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
It's believable, but is it quantified accurately? Get tested! Go to the AES show in the fall and get a free test if nothing else. I'm not sure if they're still doing that. I don't remember if they had the hearing test van at the last LA show, and I know it wasn't at the last two LA NAMM shows. Maybe they still do it in Europe. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:37:20 -0400, Mike Rivers
wrote: On 3/31/2017 9:07 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: It's believable, but is it quantified accurately? Get tested! Go to the AES show in the fall and get a free test if nothing else. I'm not sure if they're still doing that. I don't remember if they had the hearing test van at the last LA show, and I know it wasn't at the last two LA NAMM shows. Maybe they still do it in Europe. Probably giving too many people bad news - always shoot the messenger. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 31/03/2017 6:46 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. Yep, that was clear already. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Perhaps, but as stated, upside down to audiology convention. No biggie though, until you see an audiologist. :-) Trevor. |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. Trevor. |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote:
On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. Trevor. No, the SPL axis is correct. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote:
On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. Trevor. I could change that axis, but then of course it would no longer be dB SPL, just the rather less useful dB. If that is what audiologists do, they should think again. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 1/04/2017 5:00 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. No, the SPL axis is correct. For YOU perhaps, but NOT as shown on an audiologists graph as I have been saying. The figure is normally shown as the amount of loss relative to "normal" hearing threshold. I suggest you check out graphs on any hearing aid manufacturers site, or any audiologists site for reference. YOU can use whatever YOU want of course if you don't want to worry about convention. Trevor. |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 1/04/2017 5:16 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. I could change that axis, but then of course it would no longer be dB SPL, just the rather less useful dB. If that is what audiologists do, they should think again. Nope. I seriously doubt you have a properly calibrated system to give absolute SPL. And audiologists who do prefer their graph relative to a "normal" hearing reference standard as more meaningful to users anyway. But whatever works for you is fine *if* nobody else is involved. Trevor. |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 18:58:46 +1100, Trevor wrote:
On 1/04/2017 5:00 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. No, the SPL axis is correct. For YOU perhaps, but NOT as shown on an audiologists graph as I have been saying. The figure is normally shown as the amount of loss relative to "normal" hearing threshold. I suggest you check out graphs on any hearing aid manufacturers site, or any audiologists site for reference. YOU can use whatever YOU want of course if you don't want to worry about convention. Sure, but I wasn't interested in the relative measurement - why would I be when I had measured the much more useful absolute data? d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 19:08:24 +1100, Trevor wrote:
On 1/04/2017 5:16 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. I could change that axis, but then of course it would no longer be dB SPL, just the rather less useful dB. If that is what audiologists do, they should think again. Nope. I seriously doubt you have a properly calibrated system to give absolute SPL. And audiologists who do prefer their graph relative to a "normal" hearing reference standard as more meaningful to users anyway. But whatever works for you is fine *if* nobody else is involved. My calibration is pretty good. I reckon I'm within 2 or 3dB of the right level. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#32
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 1/04/2017 7:08 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 18:58:46 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 1/04/2017 5:00 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. No, the SPL axis is correct. For YOU perhaps, but NOT as shown on an audiologists graph as I have been saying. The figure is normally shown as the amount of loss relative to "normal" hearing threshold. I suggest you check out graphs on any hearing aid manufacturers site, or any audiologists site for reference. YOU can use whatever YOU want of course if you don't want to worry about convention. Sure, but I wasn't interested in the relative measurement - why would I be when I had measured the much more useful absolute data? HOW did you calibrate your system to provide "absolute SPL' then? Bet it doesn't! Relative is a lot easier. Trevor. |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 1/04/2017 7:09 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 19:08:24 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 1/04/2017 5:16 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. I could change that axis, but then of course it would no longer be dB SPL, just the rather less useful dB. If that is what audiologists do, they should think again. Nope. I seriously doubt you have a properly calibrated system to give absolute SPL. And audiologists who do prefer their graph relative to a "normal" hearing reference standard as more meaningful to users anyway. But whatever works for you is fine *if* nobody else is involved. My calibration is pretty good. I reckon I'm within 2 or 3dB of the right level. And you know this how exactly? Trevor. |
#34
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 19:12:21 +1100, Trevor wrote:
On 1/04/2017 7:08 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 18:58:46 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 1/04/2017 5:00 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. No, the SPL axis is correct. For YOU perhaps, but NOT as shown on an audiologists graph as I have been saying. The figure is normally shown as the amount of loss relative to "normal" hearing threshold. I suggest you check out graphs on any hearing aid manufacturers site, or any audiologists site for reference. YOU can use whatever YOU want of course if you don't want to worry about convention. Sure, but I wasn't interested in the relative measurement - why would I be when I had measured the much more useful absolute data? HOW did you calibrate your system to provide "absolute SPL' then? Bet it doesn't! Relative is a lot easier. I used an SPL meter and a fixture. Stax headphones make this a reliable method because the sound generating area is so large. You can move the measuring mic around by tens of millimetres and the level doesn't change. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 19:13:20 +1100, Trevor wrote:
On 1/04/2017 7:09 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 19:08:24 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 1/04/2017 5:16 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:21:28 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:55 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:46:18 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:33:50 +1100, Trevor wrote: On 31/03/2017 6:13 AM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:10:03 +1300, geoff wrote: But what do you do when the years move on and some correction is needed? Here's a pair of self-administered audiograms, from 2001 and three days ago. I've actually won a bit of bass, but the top end is vanishing fast. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram.png These were taken with a nice pair of Stax phones, so they should be pretty reliable. On the recent one you can see a masking peak at 4kHz caused by tinnitus. I take it that it is upside-down to the usual sense ? No, that's a normal threshold curve. That is how loud sounds have to be for me to just barely detect them. Not a threshold curve as plotted by an audiologist however. Geoff is right, it's upside down to what is normally accepted. Well, just so we are clear - the x-axis is frequency and the y-axis is SPL. I've plotted it the way it makes most sense to me. Does this make more sense? http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/audiogram2.png Yep, except the SPL axis should be +10 to -80dB. I could change that axis, but then of course it would no longer be dB SPL, just the rather less useful dB. If that is what audiologists do, they should think again. Nope. I seriously doubt you have a properly calibrated system to give absolute SPL. And audiologists who do prefer their graph relative to a "normal" hearing reference standard as more meaningful to users anyway. But whatever works for you is fine *if* nobody else is involved. My calibration is pretty good. I reckon I'm within 2 or 3dB of the right level. And you know this how exactly? I'm used to measurement. I spent several years as chief engineer of Marconi Instruments. I know how to make root-sum-square calculations of the effects of the various uncertainties in any system. And more importantly, I know how to tell the difference between good measurements and unreliable ones. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:37:20 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote: On 3/31/2017 9:07 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: It's believable, but is it quantified accurately? Get tested! Go to the AES show in the fall and get a free test if nothing else. I'm not sure if they're still doing that. I don't remember if they had the hearing test van at the last LA show, and I know it wasn't at the last two LA NAMM shows. Maybe they still do it in Europe. Probably giving too many people bad news - always shoot the messenger. They were basically using the attendees as part of a long-term study, since so many people came back to the show year after year. They developed a database of many people with measurements made over something like a thirty year period, for use in all kinds of long-term hearing studies. So it's not like they were doing this entirely out of the goodness of their hearts. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 1 Apr 2017 05:59:25 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:37:20 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote: On 3/31/2017 9:07 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: It's believable, but is it quantified accurately? Get tested! Go to the AES show in the fall and get a free test if nothing else. I'm not sure if they're still doing that. I don't remember if they had the hearing test van at the last LA show, and I know it wasn't at the last two LA NAMM shows. Maybe they still do it in Europe. Probably giving too many people bad news - always shoot the messenger. They were basically using the attendees as part of a long-term study, since so many people came back to the show year after year. They developed a database of many people with measurements made over something like a thirty year period, for use in all kinds of long-term hearing studies. So it's not like they were doing this entirely out of the goodness of their hearts. --scott If that is so I would have to question their protocol. A venue where everybody is involved in audio production is far from average - in fact it could fairly be described as a pathological extreme. I'd be interested to know if - and what - they eventually published. And how it was peer-reviewed. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 4/1/2017 6:54 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
If that is so I would have to question their protocol. A venue where everybody is involved in audio production is far from average - in fact it could fairly be described as a pathological extreme. Sure, it's a special interest group, but it's a group of people who should be taking care of their hearing, and who could well benefit from knowing when it's changing. The kids listening to concerts that are too loud are represented by the audio engineers who (a) mix those concerts, and (b) turn up the monitors too loud when tracking or mixing in the studio. AES isn't just for audio lab rats. Musicians who play too loud on stage also attend. And those like me who are in our 70s and still have pretty good hearing represent a good baseline for people who take care of their ears and haven't had any illnesses that degrade hearing. And people like me who have measurable hearing loss represent just plain old people. So, I don't see it as a skewed study, just one where the subjects care about how they're hearing. I'd be interested to know if - and what - they eventually published. And how it was peer-reviewed. I have no idea. I think that the reason why the hearing test van is no longer at every show is because of money. There was always a sponsor or two. Shure did it for many years, and one of the "protect your hearing" organizations was also a sponsor. It was good publicity for them. But money is tighter, and no new knights in shining armor have stepped forward. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#39
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On Sat, 1 Apr 2017 09:10:15 -0400, Mike Rivers
wrote: On 4/1/2017 6:54 AM, Don Pearce wrote: If that is so I would have to question their protocol. A venue where everybody is involved in audio production is far from average - in fact it could fairly be described as a pathological extreme. Sure, it's a special interest group, but it's a group of people who should be taking care of their hearing, and who could well benefit from knowing when it's changing. The kids listening to concerts that are too loud are represented by the audio engineers who (a) mix those concerts, and (b) turn up the monitors too loud when tracking or mixing in the studio. AES isn't just for audio lab rats. Musicians who play too loud on stage also attend. And those like me who are in our 70s and still have pretty good hearing represent a good baseline for people who take care of their ears and haven't had any illnesses that degrade hearing. And people like me who have measurable hearing loss represent just plain old people. So, I don't see it as a skewed study, just one where the subjects care about how they're hearing. I'd be interested to know if - and what - they eventually published. And how it was peer-reviewed. I have no idea. I think that the reason why the hearing test van is no longer at every show is because of money. There was always a sponsor or two. Shure did it for many years, and one of the "protect your hearing" organizations was also a sponsor. It was good publicity for them. But money is tighter, and no new knights in shining armor have stepped forward. Even if the group wasn't one that was exposed to overly-loud sounds (and I would certainly dispute that), the fact that it is a group with special attention of any kind to its hearing would, for me, rule it out of a study unless it was a study of specifically that phenomenon d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#40
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Earplugs
On 2/04/2017 8:33 AM, Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message news Gareth Magennis wrote: My live EQ is Anti Jack. There is A LOT of 3.15kHz taken out, and a reasonable amount either side. This is usually a function of using PA speakers with a presence boost combined with microphones (like the SM57) that have a presence boost. All that together in a room means you often get way too much exaggeration in that region. Today I am doing a function where they have specified a SM57 for violin - yuk ! Or "Ouch'. I will take and demonstrate to them some alternatives. geoff |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
where to get musician's earplugs in san francisco | Pro Audio | |||
Earplugs | Pro Audio | |||
Effective earplugs | Car Audio | |||
Suggestion for good noise cancellation earplugs | Audio Opinions |