Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

More so than rockers? or intemperate mixers?

In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to be
hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

It's clearly a false statement.

Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to be
hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

It's clearly a false statement.

Hearing impairment in orchestral musicians.

Ostri B, Eller N, Dahlin E, Skylv G.

Department of Audiology, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Symphony orchestra musicians from The Royal Danish Theatre (15 females and 80
males) aged 22 to 64 years were audiologically examined to elucidate the presence
and the frequency of noise-induced hearing loss among classical musicians.
Compared to a reference material (ISO 7029) the median hearing thresholds of the
musicians were increased for all age groups. When using hearing sensitivity in one
or both ears less than 20 dB HL as a criterion for normality, it was found the 58%
of the musicians had a hearing impairment. 50% of the males and 13% of the females
showed a typical audiogram with a notched curve at higher frequencies normally
attributed to occupational noise exposure. Furthermore, a significantly poorer
hearing on the left ear was found at higher frequencies among the violinists. It
is concluded that symphonic musicians suffer from hearing impairment and that the
impairment might be ascribed to symphonic music.

PMID: 2609103 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Graham

Andre Jute said:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

The count might actually be higher, but never mind that now.

professional musicians, particularly classical performers,
are likely to be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Arnii knows this "fact" because professional musicians freely admit they do
not stuff feces in their ears. Without the feces stuffing, Arnii believes
ears are vulnerable to damage from music. He learned this lesson the hard
way, you know. ;-)

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...
:
:
: Jenn wrote:
:
: In article .com,
: "Andre Jute" wrote:
:
: Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:
:
: professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be
: hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds
:
: Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.
:
: It's clearly a false statement.
:
: Hearing impairment in orchestral musicians.
:
: Ostri B, Eller N, Dahlin E, Skylv G.
:
: Department of Audiology, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
:
: Symphony orchestra musicians from The Royal Danish Theatre (15 females and 80
: males) aged 22 to 64 years were audiologically examined to elucidate the
presence
: and the frequency of noise-induced hearing loss among classical musicians.
: Compared to a reference material (ISO 7029) the median hearing thresholds of
the
: musicians were increased for all age groups. When using hearing sensitivity in
one
: or both ears less than 20 dB HL as a criterion for normality, it was found the
58%
: of the musicians had a hearing impairment. 50% of the males and 13% of the
females
: showed a typical audiogram with a notched curve at higher frequencies normally
: attributed to occupational noise exposure. Furthermore, a significantly poorer
: hearing on the left ear was found at higher frequencies among the violinists.
It
: is concluded that symphonic musicians suffer from hearing impairment and that
the
: impairment might be ascribed to symphonic music.
:
: PMID: 2609103 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
:
:
: Graham
: :::::::::::::::::
It is a sad occupational hazard, that indeed the change of running into some
form of hearing problem is pretty high. From an posting of mine on RAO, feb 16th:

http://orkestengehoor.nl/achtergrond.../r816_3_ra.pdf
is a dutch report from 2003 : brass section players are on average exposed to 88
dbA SPL dayly average over a 260 day working year .

K. Kähäri (Linholmen Development, Göteborg) reported in 2003 that
only 26 % of classical orchestra performers had no hearing impairements

within the remaining 74 %:
41 % suffered diminished hearing capabilities
43 % suffered tinnitus
39 % suffered hyperacuses
* * *
in reaction, "Bryan" wrote in message

oups.com...

I can vouch for that. I'm not a professional musician and I only play
maybe once or twice a week. But when I played in a big band in front
of the trumpet section, I actually wore earplugs sometimes because it
hurt! I do have tinnitus (ringing in the ears), but it doesn't seem to
interfere with "normal" hearing ... yet.
* * *
Some recommendations are to put the trumpet section on a platform,
and a little further to the back - this will end up in regulations in the EU.
It appears orchestra's acoustical output has been going up by several dB
the last 20 years.

Rudy

Andre Jute wrote:
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

While in this thread I'm glad to see Poopie do some work for a change
rather than just carp uselessly, the context of Krueger's lie was not
about orchestral performers.

In fact, Krueger doesn't know about which musicians he made this
blanket accusion of hearing damage because I never said which
performers I used.

That is why Krueger is being asked specifically to:

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri, Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Krueger, I know all that stuff below. But it is about orchestral
musicians and singers and jazzmen. They're not the musicians I used for
my tests. You rashly made a statement in a particular context about
musicians whose description you did not know. Now I'm asking you to
prove it. None of the stuff below is more than marginally relevant.
Stop wriggling and get on with your proof.

Andre Jute
Precision is the essential art of science

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri, Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crankup
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be
hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

It's clearly a false statement.

Hearing impairment in orchestral musicians.

Ostri B, Eller N, Dahlin E, Skylv G.

Department of Audiology, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Symphony orchestra musicians from The Royal Danish Theatre (15 females and 80
males) aged 22 to 64 years were audiologically examined to elucidate the
presence
and the frequency of noise-induced hearing loss among classical musicians.
Compared to a reference material (ISO 7029) the median hearing thresholds of
the
musicians were increased for all age groups. When using hearing sensitivity
in one
or both ears less than 20 dB HL as a criterion for normality, it was found
the 58%
of the musicians had a hearing impairment. 50% of the males and 13% of the
females
showed a typical audiogram with a notched curve at higher frequencies
normally
attributed to occupational noise exposure. Furthermore, a significantly
poorer
hearing on the left ear was found at higher frequencies among the violinists.
It
is concluded that symphonic musicians suffer from hearing impairment and that
the
impairment might be ascribed to symphonic music.

PMID: 2609103 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Graham

This is far less a concern now than in previous years due to efforts,
mostly from the AFofM, to prevent such damage. If you look at the stage
set-up of a great many professional orchestras, you will see individual
sonic barriers between the percussion and the back row of winds, often
attached to individual chairs. Many, many players use ear plugs while
on stage. The American Symphony Orchestra League has sponsored studies
in the past couple of years to test the effectiveness of such measures;
I'll try to dig them out of my library and post them here. In any case,
the statement that professional musicians are "likely" to have suffered
hearing damage is ridiculous. The majority of classical musicians don't
even perform in large ensembles.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri, Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".
2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Jenn commented in
:

snip (that's why the reference is left there, folks ...)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".

Uh, I read "violists". Typo? Or did he mean the viola players?
To the right, and in front of? "right in front of", as an approximation?

2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Uh, 'made deaf(er)', I would think! (to what degree not defined)
--
RdM

"One thing you have probably wondered about for many years is why
musicians who sing rock'n'roll tend to be extremely thin, if not
actually dead, whereas those who sing, say, opera, tend to be
humongous wads of cellulite. The reason for this phenomenon,
scientists now believe, is that fat cells are actually destroyed by
stupid lyrics." - Dave Barry


"Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you
know they produce quarrels." - 2 Timothy 2:23

In article ,
RdM wrote:

Jenn commented in

m:

snip (that's why the reference is left there, folks ...)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".

Uh, I read "violists". Typo? Or did he mean the viola players?
To the right, and in front of? "right in front of", as an approximation?

My error.

2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?


Uh, 'made deaf(er)', I would think! (to what degree not defined)

I use the term "deafened" like the first definition in my dictionary: to
cause (someone) to lose the power of hearing.

If I am not mistaken they tested rock and orchestral players in a
study in the very late 70s and found that the orchestral types had more
hearing loss. However, they were on average 20 to 30 years older.

This is a question to be answered by legitimate testing and not
opinion and **** slinging. I just don't know where the latest test
results are.

Jenn writes back in
:

2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?


Uh, 'made deaf(er)', I would think! (to what degree not defined)

I use the term "deafened" like the first definition in my dictionary: to
cause (someone) to lose the power of hearing.

I tend to think of it as having a degree of degree. One can be deafened after
a loud noise nearby, albeit temporarily. Or crushed, in an argument.
Or flattened. It's a description of a process. It need not mean made
profoundly deaf finally and for good in an instant, I'd think, although
proximity to high explosives detonating may achieve that, I suppose ...

Even your definition "to lose ... "; but to what degree? Partial is included.

IMO. Thanks for your reply.
Best wishes.
--
RdM

Dédé "McKelvy" Jute wrote :


While in this thread I'm glad to see Poopie do some work for a change
rather than just carp uselessly, the context of Krueger's lie was not
about orchestral performers.


....LOL !!! Poor Dédé is too petty and conceited to recognize that he has
done an ass of himself.

In this story, *you* are the *LIAR*, Dédé, and in the end you sound 10 time
worst than the ones you criticize.

In French : http://www.french.press.hear-it.org/page.dsp?page=1838
In English : http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyo...0040112a.shtml

Do you need more, eh Môron ?

In , Arny Krueger wrote :


"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also
cause hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the
high-frequencies. The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly
equivalent to a jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the
high-frequency harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used
while practicing to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al.
1983; Ostri, Eller et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff
1991; Palin 1994; Teie 1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001;
Kahari, Axelsson et al. 2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost
3/4 had a hearing disorder, with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus
being the most common maladies. (Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right
in front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran
opera singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas
at close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians
have a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

--
"Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?"

Dave Weil, Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Krueger, I know all that stuff below. But it is about orchestral
musicians and singers and jazzmen. They're not the musicians I used for
my tests. You rashly made a statement in a particular context about
musicians whose description you did not know. Now I'm asking you to
prove it. None of the stuff below is more than marginally relevant.
Stop wriggling and get on with your proof.

In fact Jute, the studies below even mention solo musicians, such as a
picolo player.

They also mention vocalists.

Did you exclude all vocalists from your study?

(Watch Jute try to twist and turn his way out of this!)

I found 100's if not 1,000's of studies involving all kinds of musicans,
ranging from solists, to small ensembles to large orchestras.

Jute, learn how to read, and quit changing your story!

Andre Jute (proven liar)

Precision is the essential art of science, (and Jute has no idea of how to
be precise!)

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also
cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the
high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while
practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri,
Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing
disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common
maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians
have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likelyto
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Krueger then sent a bunch of irrelevant quotations which Jute dismissed
with contempt:

Krueger, I know all that stuff below. But it is about orchestral
musicians and singers and jazzmen. They're not the musicians I used for
my tests. You rashly made a statement in a particular context about
musicians whose description you did not know. Now I'm asking you to
prove it. None of the stuff below is more than marginally relevant.
Stop wriggling and get on with your proof.

This thrilling mystery hunt continues with the villein of the piece,
Arny Krueger, speaking:

In fact Jute, the studies below even mention solo musicians, such as a
picolo player.

Nope. Not a picolo player either.

They also mention vocalists.

Nope. Those that you condemn, without knowing what kind of musicians
they are, are not vocalists either.

Did you exclude all vocalists from your study?

I'm asking the questions, Krueger. You are the one trying to distract
us with bull****. You said musicians, of whom I gave no description,
were suffering "endemic hearing damage".

(Watch Jute try to twist and turn his way out of this!)

I'm sitting relaxed in an ergonomic chair of my own design, licensed
and paying royalties. You're the one twisting and turning because in
your "zeal to flame Andre" you told several lies about a group of
people you don't even know who they are.

We'll come to the rest of your lies when we finish with this one.

I found 100's if not 1,000's of studies involving all kinds of musicans,
ranging from solists, to small ensembles to large orchestras.

Yada, yada, yada. A scientist would have ascertained what he is talking
about before he shot off his wad over himself and three newsgroups.
Only a posturer would shoot off his wad first and then try to find out
what he shot it off about.

Jute, learn how to read, and quit changing your story!

You're commenting in vacuo about a story I haven't told yet. You are
making up things about a fact you haven't heard because I didn't tell
it to you. This is your life, Arny Krueger, pretend expert.

Andre Jute (proven liar)

Really? You can sling **** all you like, Krueger, but this is one lie
you cannot wriggle out of, because in this letter you already admitted
you didn't know which musicians I was talking about.

You are a proven liar, Krueger.

Precision is the essential art of science, (and Jute has no idea of how to
be precise!)

Oh, I dug a very precise hole for you, two feet wide and five and a
half feet long, a nice grave-shape. You dived into it face first and
now you are scrambling to get out.

Sling all the insults you want. The fact remains: You didn't have the
facts, because I carefully refrained from giving you the crucial fact.
You spouted off without the facts. Now you spout off insults to cover
up your lies.

How can we ever again trust a single word you say?

With utmost contempt for the proven liar Krueger.

Andre Jute
Your mind is a precision instrument. Treat it with respect. -- Andre
Jute, graduation speech

Here's Krueger's ever more desperately inappropriate "research" to
prove he didn't tell a lie about a subject he didn't know the
particulars of (because I didn't tell them to him) and which he is now
trying to define -- after he told lies about it! And so on and so on
round and round the mulberry tree, because Krueger doesn't know which
musicians I'm talking about -- I never told him.

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also
cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the
high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while
practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri,
Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing
disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common
maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians
have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

And so on and so on round and round the mulberry tree, because Krueger
doesn't know which musicians I'm talking about -- I never told him.

In article
,
Jenn wrote:

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".
2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Careful! It says "violists."

Stephen

Andre Jute wrote:



Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue


Second to honesty, but you wouldn't know about that.

It appears that your accusation about Arnie is in
fact Jute Lie No. 1.618 * 10^99. Orchestral
musicians _do_ indeed suffer from noise induced
hearing damage. Care to apologise?


Andy

Jenn wrote:

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Yes, deafened - having their hearing capabilities diminished.
Deafness is not an absolute but a whole spectrum of impairments.

Andy

Jenn wrote:

2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?


Uh, 'made deaf(er)', I would think! (to what degree not defined)


I use the term "deafened" like the first definition in my dictionary: to
cause (someone) to lose the power of hearing.

To what degree? Humans with even very profound auditory damage
can peceive some sounds by means other than the ears.

Deafness is not an absolute but a spectrum of impairment. It
is perfectly correct to use deafened for any loss of hearing.

Andy

"Andy Cowley" wrote in message
...
Andre Jute wrote:



Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue


Second to honesty, but you wouldn't know about that.

It appears that your accusation about Arnie is in
fact Jute Lie No. 1.618 * 10^99. Orchestral
musicians _do_ indeed suffer from noise induced
hearing damage. Care to apologise?


Andy



Sorry to butt in, Andy, when you are all having such a good
time:-)

Just for the record, Arny said "classical performers" not
orchestral musicians. There is a huge difference as Jenn pointed
out. I work daily with classical performers who have never played
in a symphony orchestra, and are never likely to do so. I find their
levels of audio perception often quite astounding.

Just my 2 cents. Carry on:-)

Iain

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Jenn wrote:

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger
halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to
crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right
in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".
2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Careful! It says "violists."

Stephen


Was this Arny again? Maybe he has special information
relating to baroque (pre-classical) ensembles, where the
viol, with six strings, was indeed used.

But, there again, perhaps he just can't spell:-))

Iain

In article ,
"Iain Churches" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Jenn wrote:

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"... Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result.

1. The violinists don't sit "right in front of the brass".
2. The last sentence is obvious hyperbole. "Deafened"?

Careful! It says "violists."

Was this Arny again? Maybe he has special information
relating to baroque (pre-classical) ensembles, where the
viol, with six strings, was indeed used.

Someone would have to hit you with one to damage your hearing!

But, there again, perhaps he just can't spell:-))

That's proven, but it wasn't him in this case. Arny knows about
deafening musicians from his volunteer job running monitor mixes.

Stephen

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

Just for the record, Arny said "classical performers" not
orchestral musicians. There is a huge difference as Jenn pointed
out.

It's just more defensive hair-splitting. Fact is that musical instruments
and voices can easily be loud enough that they will damage any ears that are
nearby, especially after protracted exposures.

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

BTW, thanks for admitting that you've damaged your hearing, since
you're on the record as having cut the grass without hearing
protection when growing up. and, since youa re in your 60s, 1/4 of
your peers have significant hearing loss. Couple that with all of that
live recording you claim to do and all of the work in the automotive
manufacturing business that you've done, it's a wonder that you can
even hear your chruch organ.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 19:12:48 +0000, Goofball_star_dot_etal
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

No, YOU lose, because there's nothing there about "cutting the grass".

BTW, I have no doubt that SOMEBODY has done it. People have certainly
done it with grain and corn and just about ANYTHING can be done in the
name of art (one artist designated a column of air above a certain
plot of land as "art"). Heck, artistic grass cutting is done at
American Football stadiums and baseball stadiums all the time.

I'm sure that Arnold thanks you for attempting to protect his mangling
of the English language though. Shame that you exposed your lack of
comprehension skills though.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:30:07 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 19:12:48 +0000, Goofball_star_dot_etal
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

No, YOU lose, because there's nothing there about "cutting the grass".

I've seen it, boyo. It was cut alright, mum knows her grass.. They
probably get some deaf sod like a classical performer to do it.

Have some mo
http://www.artsadmin.co.uk/artists/a...hesistext.html





BTW, I have no doubt that SOMEBODY has done it. People have certainly
done it with grain and corn and just about ANYTHING can be done in the
name of art (one artist designated a column of air above a certain
plot of land as "art"). Heck, artistic grass cutting is done at
American Football stadiums and baseball stadiums all the time.

I'm sure that Arnold thanks you for attempting to protect his mangling
of the English language though.

Hardly

Shame that you exposed your lack of
comprehension skills though.

Better than your welsh, I think.

"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message : Better than
your *welsh
, I think.
:
* so your real name could be Latte Tod Rats Labfoocgh ... interesting :-)
R.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be
hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

It's clearly a false statement.

Bad bet. Arny doesn't post things like this if he doesn't have data to back
them up.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Andre Jute wrote:
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

While in this thread I'm glad to see Poopie do some work for a change
rather than just carp uselessly, the context of Krueger's lie was not
about orchestral performers.

You're lying again. He specifically mentioned them.


In fact, Krueger doesn't know about which musicians he made this
blanket accusion of hearing damage because I never said which
performers I used.

Actually you did in at least one post.


That is why Krueger is being asked specifically to:

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Get used to the fact that if it's about audio, Arny will have data to back
him up.


Andre Jute
Precision is the first scientific virtue

And one you don't seem to possess.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely to
be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

Krueger, I know all that stuff below. But it is about orchestral
musicians and singers and jazzmen. They're not the musicians I used for
my tests.

THEN WHAT KIND OF MUSICANS DID YOU USE?


You rashly made a statement in a particular context about
musicians whose description you did not know. Now I'm asking you to
prove it. None of the stuff below is more than marginally relevant.
Stop wriggling and get on with your proof.

STOP PLAYING GAMES AND GI E SPECIFICS ON THE KIND OF PEOPLE YOU USED AND
YOU'LL GET A SPECIFIC ANSWER

So far data has been provided on many diffferent kind of perormers, what did
you use? People who play the Zither? Ducimer? Autoharp? Harmonica? Stop
being such a **** and get on with it.

You want a specific answer give specific data.

Andre Jute
Precision is the essential art of science

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...g/hearing.html

"Musical instruments can generate considerable sound and thus can also
cause
hearing loss. The most damaging type of sounds is in the high-frequencies.
The piccolo generates sound levels up to 112 dB.roughly equivalent to a
jackhammer at 30 feet.

"Violins and violas can be sufficiently loud to cause permanent hearing
loss. This is typically worse in the left ear which is nearer the
instrument. Unlike other instruments, the ability to hear the
high-frequency
harmonics is crucial to these musicians. Mutes can be used while
practicing
to reduce long term exposure. (Karlsson, Lundquist et al. 1983; Ostri,
Eller
et al. 1989; Royster, Royster et al. 1991; Sataloff 1991; Palin 1994; Teie
1998; Obeling and Poulsen 1999; Hoppmann 2001; Kahari, Axelsson et al.
2001). In a study of rock/Jazz musicions, almost 3/4 had a hearing
disorder,
with hearing loss, hyperacusis and tinnitus being the most common
maladies.
(Kaharit, Zachau et al. 2003)

http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/hearingloss.htm

"But Furtwängler's story illustrates a downside. To fill the larger halls
with sufficient sound, the voices, instruments and ensembles had to crank
up
to potentially ear-damaging levels. Countless violists, who sit right in
front of the brass, have been deafened as a result. And some veteran opera
singers, thanks to years of being screeched at by their fellow divas at
close range, have lost a good deal of hearing.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/music.htm

Studies show that 37% of rock musicians and 52% of classical musicians
have
a measurable hearing loss (Chasin, M., 1998).

And on, and on, and on...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281:

professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are likely
to be
hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds

Prove this vicious generalization, Krueger.

It's clearly a false statement.

Bad bet. Arny doesn't post things like this if he doesn't have data to
back them up.

It definitely separated the posers from the players.

"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass
can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't
make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

Again. ;-)

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 19:50:45 +0000, Goofball_star_dot_etal
wrote:

I'm sure that Arnold thanks you for attempting to protect his mangling
of the English language though.

Hardly

OK, so he DOESN'T thank you.

Ungrateful sod.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 15:57:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

Again. ;-)

As previously pointed out, nothing in there about cutting the grass.

So YOU lose.

Again.

in article ,
Goofball_star_dot_etal at ow wrote on 12/15/05 2:50 PM:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:30:07 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 19:12:48 +0000, Goofball_star_dot_etal
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:07:32 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:53:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Look, perfectly innocent and common experiences like cutting the grass can
damage your ears. Just because its done in the pursuit of art doesn't make
it perfectly safe.

I'd be interested in seeing someone cut the grass in the pursuit of
art.

http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Community/GrassArt.htm

You lose.

No, YOU lose, because there's nothing there about "cutting the grass".

I've seen it, boyo. It was cut alright, mum knows her grass.. They
probably get some deaf sod like a classical performer to do it.

Have some mo
http://www.artsadmin.co.uk/artists/a...hesistext.html





BTW, I have no doubt that SOMEBODY has done it. People have certainly
done it with grain and corn and just about ANYTHING can be done in the
name of art (one artist designated a column of air above a certain
plot of land as "art"). Heck, artistic grass cutting is done at
American Football stadiums and baseball stadiums all the time.

I'm sure that Arnold thanks you for attempting to protect his mangling
of the English language though.

Hardly

Shame that you exposed your lack of
comprehension skills though.

Better than your welsh, I think.

Uh huh.