Good, somebody with evidence, albeit "sample of one." So I'd appreciate a bit more detail on "cause" and "effect" please.Yeeeeeaaahhh PELTOR ROCKS🙂been wearing 98's for 10 years at work , i'd be deaf by now if I hadn't. Used to go to parties and dance right in front of the bass bins, not any worse for wear, bass was so intense my eyeballs shook ,or maybe it was my head as a whole🙂
Have you had your hearing tested by a professional - and remembered to ask them for your hearing chart of frequencies to take home?
How many exposures to the kind of extreme bass have you had - even just a very rough estimate. And other relevant demographics.
Likewise some questions for anybody else with exposure experience.
Thanks
Ben
My dad was a B-25 pilot. He has substantial hearing loss from them. OSHA also says 135 dB is irrecoverable damage for any length of time.
It is also documented the subsonic pressures generated by sealing ear buds are causing serious damage at "normal" listening levels.
Most anyone who has served in the military has hearing loss.
Not sure I buy the 160 dB. That is enough to cause disorientation and pain.
Let's be reasonable here. None of the 4 weighting methods correspond correctly to the human hearing sensitivity. Why would we expect them to correspond to the damage threshold?
They are just very rough approximations, and even then only valid for certain levels. The A weighting is designed for sounds at about 40 phon (~40dB 1kHz sine wave), which is veeeery far away from hearing damage threshold, so it's highly unlikely that statements made about damage thresholds as dBA values will hold any truths at low frequencies.
The best reference for frequency dependent damage thresholds is probably the image I posted at the very beginning of the thread, where the dotted line indicates the threshold of damage. (solid line is hearing threshold, and dashed line is pain threshold).
Any standards that give damage/pain thresholds as absolute dBA values are most likely only based on broadband sounds, typical technical noises like machinery, jet engines, etc.
jwmbro - thanks for insightful comments.
I have been skeptical about damage thresholds since I can't picture how they can be researched (except using guinea pigs or chinchillas that are believed to have human-like ears). Too bad guinea pigs don't ordinarily attend rock concerts. Also, unlike very other sort of legitimate measurement, there are no measures of variability across people, cultures, age, etc.
Can you please shed light on how damage threshold standards are researched?
Ben
I have been skeptical about damage thresholds since I can't picture how they can be researched (except using guinea pigs or chinchillas that are believed to have human-like ears). Too bad guinea pigs don't ordinarily attend rock concerts. Also, unlike very other sort of legitimate measurement, there are no measures of variability across people, cultures, age, etc.
Can you please shed light on how damage threshold standards are researched?
Ben
What I was told, there is a professor in USA somewhere, Michigan if I recall correctly, who does experiments on human subjects for damage thresholds, not with extremely loud noises, but still with noises loud enough to cause slight damage. Seems a bit morally questionable to me, but it's certainly useful knowledge to gain, and I guess we can be grateful that somebody is willing to do it.
Apart from that, I believe a lot of information can be inferred from short term effects. Longer exposure to sound pressure levels above around 75dB as shift workers experience them cause asymptotic threshold shift, which raises the hearing threshold by up to 15dB (depending on the length of exposure). This then recovers within the next 48 hours (depending on how high the threshold shift was), assuming the ear is not exposed to additional noise. There are no known long term effects to this, and I assume one could test stimulus frequency dependence of this temporary threshold shift, and infer similar dependencies for permanent threshold shift (hearing damage).
Thanks. Yes, I can see some research approaches but still with a chain of inferences since the "gold standard" for research which is true experimental work is hard to picture. (Maybe you could get a group of people with terminal diseases who wish to volunteer. Gruesome, but sometimes actually medical tests are done that way.)
Perhaps my puzzlement is kind of like predicting flat tires on cars. Principles of physics and chemistry can be considered yet the prediction remains cloudy.
Never the less, there is a need to understand risk from loud sound and that understanding nuanced by bass level.
Ben
Perhaps my puzzlement is kind of like predicting flat tires on cars. Principles of physics and chemistry can be considered yet the prediction remains cloudy.
Never the less, there is a need to understand risk from loud sound and that understanding nuanced by bass level.
Ben
I-4 m sorry I can't provide any reference as to my original state of hearing, and have not had a an audiologist test my hearing since my teens. Which makes me a poor test subject🙁. But here's my life, started going to teen clubs at 14 till 19 then went to the bars from 19 till 25 . The main bar I went to was the Roxx , they had 4 Ev MTL-4 's on the lower dance floor that was 25 feet in circumference. The bass was so loud that you could feel the air resonating out of your beer bottle. At bthe same time from the age 18 to 27 I attended Raves in various clubs and outdoor venues. The loudest sytem I had the pleasure of standing in front of was dubbed the "Crusher" which was put on by westbury national show systems. It was so loud I had to cover my ears which already had plugs in. Nobody else realy cared because they were all in a trance. The biggest system I've stood in front of was Destiny 5 ,they had 6 Ev MTL-4's per side with matching tops.after that I started Djing. I've tested myself and my ears are done AT 15 KHZ but I can still hear 18 hz.
You might just look for some medical research that has shown the advance of moderate hearing loss in our last two generations. I have seen only a few summaries, but it does not look good.
I am not sure we hear 18 Hz, so much as feel the weight in one's chest. LF is usually so full of harmonics, without some pretty fancy equipment, I don't know how to test. I don't think headphones work. I could be wrong. I don't have any music that low, so it is moot, or would that be mute?
I am not sure we hear 18 Hz, so much as feel the weight in one's chest. LF is usually so full of harmonics, without some pretty fancy equipment, I don't know how to test. I don't think headphones work. I could be wrong. I don't have any music that low, so it is moot, or would that be mute?
The funny thing is about 8 years ago I had heart surgery for atrial fibrillation. At the time I was given many ultrasound exams on my heart and upper body. When the tech first stuck the emitter on my chest ,I could hear it making sound. I remarked this to him and he said" well then tell me when it shuts off and turns back on" I did it and got them correct. He was surprised and said that there were only 4 other people that he'd seen that could hear the emitter in his entire career. When I run the kitchen faucet and stick my wrist on it I can hear the rushing water sound in my head. Weird eh?
Looking for answers about damage from loud bass is impossible because it's never only bass that reaches the ears.
I think this thread is pointless.
Sorry Ben.
I think this thread is pointless.
Sorry Ben.
Have you had a peek at the cousin thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/48058-preventing-hearing-damage-loud-nightclubs.html
A lot of us are concerned about the quality and maintenance of our hearing. So we want to understand threats better. Besides, fastidious curve drawing of loudspeaker output without fastidious attention to your hearing curve is a neglected aspect of DIY audio. Had your hearing curve drawn recently?
The horsepower in music across the spectrum in my home is tolerable. But what about the substantially greater oomph in the bass that those of us with woofer-yearnings expose ourselves too? Making big bass sound - as in dance clubs as per the other thread or DIY home - does not have a long-standing body of study or well understood. Or the related threats, discussed in this forum, of swimming, car doors, and other low Hz forces.
Can't say as I have a good handle on the protection of different earplugs and the related question of damage arising from bone conduction.
I am not prepared to say, as you do, that it is a waste of time and pointless to raise these questions. Sorry, Bart.
Ben
Last edited:
"Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart called the organ the "King of instruments".[4] Some of the biggest instruments have 64-foot pipes (a foot here means "sonic-foot", a measure quite close to the English measurement unit), and it sounds to an 8 Hz frequency fundamental tone. Perhaps the most distinctive feature is the ability to range from the slightest sound to the most powerful, plein-jeu impressive sonic discharge, which can be sustained in time indefinitely by the organist. For instance, the Wanamaker organ, located in Philadelphia, USA, has sonic resources comparable with three simultaneous symphony orchestras."
Maybe we should start tracking down the "baddest" church organs around and expose ourselves to truly deep bass?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(music)
Maybe we should start tracking down the "baddest" church organs around and expose ourselves to truly deep bass?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_(music)
I'm glad you responded, Ben.
Hearing loss sometimes go together with tinnitus. (if you have that bad luck, like I did.)
If tinnitus suddenly appears, after a loud party for instance, then it is caused by to long and/or to loud sound.
The tinnitus in this case is damaged vibration-hairs in the ear, each hair has its own tuning, resonance. Now it is a phantom-tone or -sound. Like someone could have an itching foot while it was amputated years before.
It is logic to assume that the the sound, that caused the tone heard now as tinnitus, was at the same frequency as the damaging sound-frequency.
Most tinnitus patients have a problem with high ringing in the ears... mine is at 12khz at a relative 96dB, measured at the university clinic by a professor.
And yes, I have my hearing measured once a year, with a plot of it. Hearing loss is at around 4khz the worst. Above 12khz... (coincidentally???...) I hear nothing at all!
It would be interesting to research how many people(%) have tinnitus sounds at which frequency.
Hearing loss sometimes go together with tinnitus. (if you have that bad luck, like I did.)
If tinnitus suddenly appears, after a loud party for instance, then it is caused by to long and/or to loud sound.
The tinnitus in this case is damaged vibration-hairs in the ear, each hair has its own tuning, resonance. Now it is a phantom-tone or -sound. Like someone could have an itching foot while it was amputated years before.
It is logic to assume that the the sound, that caused the tone heard now as tinnitus, was at the same frequency as the damaging sound-frequency.
Most tinnitus patients have a problem with high ringing in the ears... mine is at 12khz at a relative 96dB, measured at the university clinic by a professor.
And yes, I have my hearing measured once a year, with a plot of it. Hearing loss is at around 4khz the worst. Above 12khz... (coincidentally???...) I hear nothing at all!
It would be interesting to research how many people(%) have tinnitus sounds at which frequency.
Last edited:
Bart, are you sure your very logical* theory of hearing, is the same as the way hearing is understood by people who study hearing? Please tell us.
If you aren't sure, perhaps you could preface your thoughts with "...my best guess...." or "... it is simply logical to assume...." unless you are up-to-date in this field of study.
Ben
*The term "logical" is kind of the opposite of "empirical."
If you aren't sure, perhaps you could preface your thoughts with "...my best guess...." or "... it is simply logical to assume...." unless you are up-to-date in this field of study.
Ben
*The term "logical" is kind of the opposite of "empirical."
I deliberately used the words sometimes and assume.
Nowhere did I clame that "my" theory of hearing is correct, I didn't even speak of a hearing-theory. It's about the assumption of the sound frequency causing the damage, being the same as the ringing tinnitus.
"It is logic to assume that the the sound, that caused the tone heard now as tinnitus, was at the same frequency as the damaging sound-frequency."
Bye logic I mean, following a sound think path of cause and effect by known facts TO ME.
This forum is full of uneducated man that have really good logical thinking...
My English is limp too, sorry, don't know if I can explain any better, just ask if it's unclear.
Nowhere did I clame that "my" theory of hearing is correct, I didn't even speak of a hearing-theory. It's about the assumption of the sound frequency causing the damage, being the same as the ringing tinnitus.
"It is logic to assume that the the sound, that caused the tone heard now as tinnitus, was at the same frequency as the damaging sound-frequency."
Bye logic I mean, following a sound think path of cause and effect by known facts TO ME.
This forum is full of uneducated man that have really good logical thinking...
My English is limp too, sorry, don't know if I can explain any better, just ask if it's unclear.
I do not feel a thread about hearing damage is the right place for posting poorly identified personal speculative beliefs.
Ben
You couldn't believe how long it took me to create that sentence. Hope it was clear.
Ben
You couldn't believe how long it took me to create that sentence. Hope it was clear.
Look Ben, I'm not trying to be right here, I just put my experience to words on a forum where anyone has access to.
You asked in your first post how to 'assess the risk of hearing damage by loud bass'.
You didn't specify only scientists should reply, so I did put some time in your question to try and give my view from experience and from thinking about tinnitus and why I don't think bass causes damage.
Sorry you're taking it this way, there's no need for that.
Good luck with your findings, I'll keep reading. It's interesting, but I won't be posting about this any more.
If anyone should want to protect there ears somewhat from bass, it doesn't work well to wear earplugs, nor do headphones. But I experienced quite a lot of reduction in bass, when wearing them both at the same time.
You asked in your first post how to 'assess the risk of hearing damage by loud bass'.
You didn't specify only scientists should reply, so I did put some time in your question to try and give my view from experience and from thinking about tinnitus and why I don't think bass causes damage.
Sorry you're taking it this way, there's no need for that.
Good luck with your findings, I'll keep reading. It's interesting, but I won't be posting about this any more.
If anyone should want to protect there ears somewhat from bass, it doesn't work well to wear earplugs, nor do headphones. But I experienced quite a lot of reduction in bass, when wearing them both at the same time.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.