|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.74.162.231
I mean deep bass, not bloated 100-200Hz.
Do you offer stereo system (incl. portable ones) with extended deep bass for your children's hearing protection?
Postulate 1: With the lack of deep bass, children feel something is lacking in the music and thus increase the volume further. So there is more chance of hearing loss.
Postulate 2: With the deep bass, children want the feeling of the deep bass at high volume. So there is more chance of hearing loss.
Follow Ups:
"Tactile Transducers"
Are you supposed to wear these like headphones or..?
Haha. That would be a show indeed!
They are bolted to the floor or directly to the furniture and deliver bass through vibration. The effect when correctly installed results in bass you can literally feel. The volume levels to achieve the same effect without them would be insane.
... because individual listening habits can vary so much.
I think that the most important thing is to take a 15 minute break from listening every hour or so. Listening fatigue is what causes some people to turn up the volume too high.
You'll have to cite at least a couple of ASA papers on the topic.
:)
Belief applies to propositions. A question sentence is not a proposition.
Your thread topic title, and more-so, your question have an implication, which is, extended deep bass will help protect a child's hearing.
You ask:
"I mean deep bass, not bloated 100-200Hz.
Do you offer stereo system (incl. portable ones) with extended deep bass for your children's hearing protection?"
A logical response is: Should I?
Especially with the word "offer", but even without it, the implication is that deep bass will help protect a child's hearing. By asking your question, you have established a premise. This is what I've asked you to defend.
It is much like asking "Do you shop at XYZ store to save money?" Should I? Will I save money?
Politicians use similar techniques to establish a premise and then use it to create doubt about an opponent in a voter's mind. I'mm sure your use was purely accidental, but still begs the reply "Prove your premise".
On the other hand, maybe yours was just a poorly worded question.
:)
"Especially with the word "offer", but even without it, the implication is that deep bass will help protect a child's hearing. By asking your question, you have established a premise. This is what I've asked you to defend."I have to agree. But the statement might have merit but no proof. You know those vaccines they give to kids ? It would be "unethical" to test test them in a real double blind study, which is the only way to prove anything. How convenient for the people pulling in the money.
However, I went to concerts and band practices where the SPL literally melted wine glasses. Well one one glass. We had a laugh about that. I had ZERO hearing loss for very long time.
My hearing loss came at the same time as my cataracts and loss of equilibrium. (prolonged exposure to black mold)
I know people who have been at the same concerts as I was, standing right in front of the speaker that says "STAY 10 FEET AWAY OR HEARING DAMAGE WILL OCCUR", and nothing happened, and I mean for 20 years. And my friends I used to go to concerts with have perfectly fine hearing.
On the other hand, there is my Granmother who became hard of hearing after never having been to a concert of any kind. Her life was always quiet. When kids, we had to be quiet when we went over her house. And the other Grandmother, she yelled and bitched, used profanity and whatever (I really liked her) never got hard of hearing, but Grampa did. You should have heard her bitch about him !
So I got solid evidence that exposure to loud sounds is ot proven to make you go deaf. I think hearing loss is more related to mineral deficiencies, but of course such things are extremely hard to detect and even harder to deal with.
Recently in a net search I found something out. That the muscles in your ear actually do tense up and protect those little bones that transmit the sound to your cochlea.
And getting hit in the head can rip some of them off as well. But the point is, how come they aren't attached better ? Well I think that in very well nourished people they are. Mineral deficiencies cause weaknesses. Lack of copper you might get an aneurism. Lack of sulfur, gall bladder problems. Lack of chromium or vanadium you will become diabetic. (those deficiencies are not the only cause of diabetes, but if you have a deficiency it WILL cause it) I have a pretty good database, and even doctors don't have it. You ask them "What should I eat to nourish properly and abate this problem ?" most of them will say "What ?". Or "Duh".
I seem to remember tin as what is needed for hearing, or was that hair ? I could just put the whole database out there but few have the desire to read it. But mineral deficiencies are why we age differently. Even if we eat the same all our life, certain enzymes get weak, and the process compounds itself. And then you die.
To the point, give the kid some bass dammit. It will work out their ear muscles and make their ears stronger and less prone to damage.
That is what I say. Take it or leave it.
Edits: 07/13/16
"Recently in a net search I found something out. That the muscles in your ear actually do tense up and protect those little bones that transmit the sound to your cochlea. "I studied this stuff in college. As a musician and audio 'engineer', it was/is very important to me. For several years, I was a member of the Acoustical Society of America - which covers a LOT of topic territory - and I was always most interested in papers which dealt with hearing and psychoacoustics.
The biggest problem with loud sounds is percussive sound - where the waveform has a very fast rise time. As you correctly point out, there are muscles which contract to limit the movement of "the little bones". The problem with fast rise times is that the muscles don't have time to do their job before the waveform activates the little bones and on into the inner ear. So, the protection mechanism fails to protect.
And I'm not just talking about snare drums and cymbals. Any sound with an instantaneous rise time and relatively high peak level is a problem source. It can be gunshots, drop forges, nail hammers, jackhammers, various other manual labor situations, farm equipment, and on and on.
Anecdotally, since I have no evidence, I'd also agree that nutrition could play a role. We already know that insufficient amounts of various nutrients contribute to joint problems, osteoperosis, kidney and liver problems, etc. It's reasonable to suspect that such deficiencies also contribute to hearing loss in various ways.
Edit: You're a good candidate for a book titled "Why You Hear What You Hear" by Dr. Eric Heller.
:)
Edits: 07/15/16 07/15/16
"Anecdotally, since I have no evidence, I'd also agree that nutrition could play a role. We already know that insufficient amounts of various nutrients contribute to joint problems, osteoperosis, kidney and liver problems, etc. It's reasonable to suspect that such deficiencies also contribute to hearing loss in various ways."There are too many old people who never had a radio with more than one watt power who are damnear deaf and too any old hippies with perfect hearing to accept that hearing loss is caused by loud music.
But I agree with you about the percussive. Like gunshots. But then, what about all the veterans who hear just fine ?
I remember these super loud headphones I had, and I mean REALLY loud. You didn't want a power outage when you had those babies cranked up, your ears would be pounding. The thing to do was when the song was coming to the end to gradually turn down the volume.
Incidentally, buddy of mine showed up the other day with a new toy, a Simpson SPL meter and calibrator. I think the calibrator is 94 and 114 dB. The meter has an OSHA setting on it. I guess that is to determine whether to require hearing protection.
I guess that is for the people susceptible to hearing loss. Everyone is different, we have different weaknesses and strengths. Like that bullshit about second hand smoke being more dangerous than actually smoking. That is ludicrous on its face, but to the weak maybe not. There are people who smoke(d) twp packs a day and lived to their 90s. And then my ex-boss who never smoked a day in his life died of lung cancer at about 60.
I believe the main difference is body chemistry, and diet, and by that I mean getting a diet that does not match. there was a doctor wrote a book about people with different blood types need different diets. He was dismissed as a quack but now this is being looked into again.
I believe it is more than that. You can't give a Chinese and a Swede the same diet. Or those island people. Maybe as a once in a while thing, like if I eat Chinese food fine, but not being Chinese I should not want it all the time.
The trend here is to be politically correct. The mantra is "We are all the same under the skin" but that is absolutely incorrect. If they dig up your skeleton 100 years later they can tell your entire ancestry.
We need different what I call "mineral signatures" in our food. But ALL food is very weak in minerals because of modern farming. You double the yield of a crop, you half the mineral content. The soil only has so much. Think about it, why do they have to fertilize in the first place ? Because the land is played out. And they only give the plants what they need, not us. They sell by the pound so what do you think they do ?
But don't get pissed off about it, it would not be cost effective to do it the right way. I mean, an apple would cost five bucks.
Alot of it has to do with the body's ability to absorb the minerals, and also how it uses or abuses them. Ideally they get recycled by the kidneys and liver and whatever. But in some people they are excreted. So they need more.
The problem is you simply cannot tell by a blood test. These minerals do not belong in your blood, they belong in your glands. They can't just cut off some of your liver, pancreas and kidneys every year to get a reading. It is simply not practical.
But this hearing loss issue is living proof that correlation is not necessarily causation. There are too many hard of hearing people who have never been exposed to loud sounds and too many people who have fired alot of guns and went to rock concerts and all that who have near perfect hearing.
Edits: 07/17/16
I wrote Postulate 1 and Postulate 2.
I did not assert anything.
Deep subwoofer bass will eventually be a comfort sound to their generation.But yes it will diminish their low end hearing. Like earlier generations damaged their higher octave hearing.
I can't explain it well but here it goes. Remember in the 60's (ah the first problem). Most music was recorded with almost all of the music below, for a lack of an exact number, 100hz missing. This was because the average person was listening to car radios that were pretty simple. Or those portable new fangled transistor radios that didn't go below 100hz anyway.
Pop in a Chambers Brothers disk or a Monkeys disk and you'll hear what I mean.
So this generation has been raised with powered subwoofers in cars, HT stereos and they really no longer use "transistor" radios. Even ear buds go down to 50hz or deeper.
Edits: 06/24/16
.
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
The way our hearing works means that bass frequencies still lead to high frequency hearing loss.
Basically there are little hairs with a nerve ending attached. They are arranged along a tube and roughly ordered into 1/3 octaves which overlap. These are bend over by sound, if only the ones early bend over we perceive the sound as high frequency but low frequency sounds bend over all of them.
The hearing loss happens because there is a little muscle on each hair which pulls it back upright. Eventually these muscles lose the strength to do so and the ones which have been bend over the most are the first to suffer hence we lose ability to hear the highest frequencies first.
Low bass has always been harder than mids and highs and low bass requires physical size.
Does not like it very loud, but does turn his sub up too high and lay right in front of it.
I should rule out active subwoofer.
I can adjust the level of subwoofer to an appropriate level, but children may change the level setting, or sit right next to the subwoofer.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: