It’s the time of year for saving money!
Many years ago, before everyone had the option of carrying a dB meter in their smartphone, I had a friend who liked to play his music “Loud.” And what constituted loud for him? It was so far back in the mists of audiophile time that I never measured his peaks with a meter, but I do know that he was constantly melting down amps. A “normal” listening session often lasted under 15 minutes since by that time many of the amps he used went into thermal overload and shut down. I also remember seeing his pants legs move from the SPLs…
Yes, that was loud.
Another time, that I’m still wishing I had not experienced, was the MC-5 band, live. It was my first exposure to Marshall guitar amps turned up to 10 (no, there was no 11) and even with wax ear-plugs (that was all we had in those days) my ears rang for a week. I blame Wayne Kramer, their lead guitarist, personally, for a good part of my upper frequency hearing loss. I’m only good to 13KHz, now.
Early in my career as a photographer I began wearing earplugs at concerts. Along with film, earplugs were an essential part of my on-location kit. But, even with plugs, eventually all those loud sounds over the years can take their toll. But I got away relatively scot-free compared to the hearing loss horror stories I’ve heard about people who served in the armed forces and were exposed to live-fire situations.
But what do you consider loud?
Nowadays there is no reason that we can’t protect our ears with more precision. First off, earplugs are readily available in a wide variety of types. Yes, there’s still the waxy ones you can mold, but there are also plugs with built-in electronics that will attenuate loud sounds while letting soft ones through. And with those ubiquitous SPL meter apps for smartphones, there’s no excuse for not knowing exactly how loud a sound is, and whether its reached the point where plugs should be employed.
I will admit that I don’t listen to music played as loudly as I did in my youth. Rarely do I turn the volume up above 95 dB A-weighted peaks. Most of my listening is lower, and in my current room-based systems I usually find the levels peaking in the low 90’s. I wish measuring the levels coming from headphones was as easy. I fear that like many audiophiles, I probably do listen to cans at higher levels than I should for long-term ear health. I’ve read alarmist articles that claim a whole generation of listener’s have been irrevocably damaged from earphone listening. I hope not.
Of course, if you try to listen at too low a volume level the old Fletcher-Munson low frequency perceptibility curve can come into play. As music gets quieter it becomes harder for us humans to hear low frequencies. That’s why many vintage receivers and preamplifiers have a “Contour” or “bass enhancement” controls. Unfortunately, most of these controls are a “one setting fits all” type which ends up being “one setting fits none.” One of the nice advantages of a system that has digital signal processing is that you can, if needed, design and execute your own “loudness” settings for low-level listening.
So, in theory, no one should be subjected to excessive volume levels if they carry ear protection and use a SPL meter to measure levels. But some situations can’t be avoided, such as when the fire alarms went off at an audio show a couple of years back. My fingers went into my ears immediately. But then I was faced with a dilemma – do I take my fingers out of my ears, exposing them to full-level nasty alarm, to get and install my earplugs, or do I just stand here, fingers in ears, like a statue, until it stops…my solution was to walk briskly to the stairwell, which had no alarm in the immediate vicinity and then install my plugs.
Yes, sometimes loud, nasty sounds are unavoidable, and just as no one gets out of this world alive, very few of us will go through life with our hearing intact. Protect what you’ve got, because there are no miracle cures for hearing loss – once it’s gone, it’s gone…
Oddly enough, this morning’s news had a segment about how so many young kids are growing up with hearing problems, presumably because of headphones and earbuds.
My Martin Logan ESL do not like super high volume and I respect them.
loud enough to get warnings from the landlord.. less loud these days.. my currant speakers are so bright.. no real need to turn them up..
On a scale of ten to zero, 10 being as loud as the amp can give i’m usually at 4, if the source material as thin dynamic range or poorly recorded, then six, but 90% of the time 3 or 4
Paul, I have done a bit of digging on this topic for an article I was writing in realistic loudness and amplifier needs. I’m a researcher by trade and used my access to professional medical and occupational safety journals to look into the state of what we know.
Volume levels that cause instantaneous hearing loss are frequency dependent and so loud as to be rarely experienced. Even firing a gun does not cause instant hearing loss.
Peak spl levels taken of orchestra sections showed that levels between 115dBC and 130dBC were realized on stage and in the first row of the Audience. Performers don’t typically wear hearing protection, are exposed to these peaks day in and day out, yet no unusual hearing loss was found in an assessment of numerous orchestra members. Again suggesting that relatively short dynamic peaks are not of great concern.
Headphones, specifically in ear types are of a different concern for loudness. When you say you wish you could measure and know, it isn’t so simple. Studies have found that these headphones physically increase the pressure at the ear drum and in the ear canal generally. This increased presssure causes the actual sound pressure and perceived loudness to not match. My understanding was that the research into this found dummy heads to underestimate the effect too. The real answer is that we all should not be using this type of headphone. It IS causing hearing loss. These alarmist claims you mention are backed up by legitimate studies that are showing that the millennial generation has higher rates of hearing loss than past generations once accounting for age. The rate of tinnitus is also much higher.
Low frequencies are not known to be harmful to hearing at levels that anyone would experience. The levels would need to approach 200dBC below about 200hz to be of any concern. That means the use of spl meters for hearing safety is misleading. It’s led to an attack in cinemas being too loud that some researchers argue is unfounded. Movies are designed to hit or even eclips 115-120 dBC at the listening positions. However it does so only below 100hz. A hearing loss activist group secretly recorded and published LCpeak levels from a movie showing them to exceed 120dB. True but totally misleading and not a problem for our hearing.
In-ear can be dangerous, if only due to inverse square law. My advice is to make sure they seal well, and then NOT to use them in quiet environments – only use them where you are trying to block out environmental noise (commuting?), and then only turn up enough to reduce the external chaos, not swamp it completely.
Cinema peak SPLs? If your ears are ringing afterwards, the peaks are a concern and _HAVE_ caused slight damage!
Thank you for posting Nigel. You should remember my comment came from published scientific journals and not personal experience or opinions. Your post is the latter and doesn’t address what I noted. Making sure the headphones have a good seal to the ear only makes the problem worse, not better. These kinds of headphones are more dangerous than on ear types.
As for cinema peak levels, again, what I noted came from real data, not perceptions. I don’t know what to say about ringing in the ears, but I never made reference to that. Unless a theater is far exceeding reference levels (and that would be pretty unusual since most theaters can barely achieve reference levels) then there is no reason that anyone should have hearing loss. Bass is not known to cause hearing damage, only mid and high frequencies. Cinema reference levels has traditionally been 105dB’s in those frequencies, and this won’t cause hearing damage or loss given the short periods that such levels are achieved. Modern ATMOS systems have pushed that limit to 115dB, but that is a hardware limit, not an expectation of the source material. Even very short duration bursts at 115dB is not likely to cause any permanent damage.
Remember that I noted studies into hearing loss of symphony performers and what was found is that they are exposed to very loud volumes (far in excess of 115dB) for far longer durations, and have no unusual hearing loss. There remains no evidence that anyone has suffered hearing loss from cinemas and I remain convinced that this is highly unlikely to be true.
I have a wife… I probably don’t need to say any more, but, since we share the room the audio system is in, I need to listen to music/video-audio at a level lower than I would were it just me. I’ve reached the point I don’t even listen when I’m alone at the volumes I used to listen some years ago. The difference now is, by myself, I tend to up the volume to the point where all the instruments sound like I think they should. The one thing I miss when listening with my wife in the room.
I built a soundproof dedicated room for this reason. I have a wife and child and I like to listen at loud levels. To avoid bothering her and waking my daughter (at night) I made sure the room was far away and highly soundproof. I’ve measured volume differences inside and outside the room as much as 60dB’s in the midrange (higher in the HF’s but I also have a noisefloor problem).
I’m currently having the opposite problem… three different MP3 players in and I still can’t find one loud enough to be of any real use in the gym.
You need to find earphones with higher sensitivity – they will play louder. Perhaps the these would work for you – they’re inexpensive, too – https://audiophilereview.com/headphones/15-in-ear-monitors-that-dont-suck.html
While Steven’s advice is right on (headphone impedance matters too), I would consider another possible option. Look for a noise canceling headphone. If you can handle using a large over the ear type, that is “healthier” but even an in-ear could be fine. The noise canceling effect reduces noises that you need to overcome and allow you to listen at lower volumes. These headphones also have a built in headphone amplifier that can likely drive them to their output limit.
As one who has Menieres disease, is already deaf in my left ear and taking NSAID pain meds recently for a rotator cuff injury caused hearing loss and increased tinnitus in my right ear; the thing I most worry about is people using headphones and air buds in the presence of high background noise in the: plane, bus, subway, street and even the beach (yes, crashing waves). The volume levels required to overcome background noise are frightening. I highly recommend noise canceling headphones in these situations. Please do your own experiments, play music in high noise, then play in the quiet without changing the volume control and see for yourself.
Actually noise-isolating earphones are better in noisy environments than noise cancelling. An in-ear with deep insertion can deliver 30 dB of isolation. Also some noise canceling is not equal across all frequencies. Recently I came across a pair that really only cancelled lower mids and bass. I’ve gotten the most complete isolation from custom in-ears, but the Etymotics were a close second – https://audiophilereview.com/headphones/my-ideal-workout-earphones.html
This is true, but with hearing loss issues potentially being worse from in-ear types, it may actually be better to use a really good noise canceling type. The best ANC headphones have as good or better noise isolation as the best in-ear type. Look at these measurements for examples:
https://www.innerfidelity.com/images/EtymoticER4XR.pdf
or
https://www.innerfidelity.com/images/MassdropNobelX.pdf
vs
https://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BoseQuietComfort35WiredActive.pdf
You can see the BOSE has nearly as good or even better isolation at most frequencies, including LF’s. This isn’t common of all ANC headphones. Only the top Sony, Bose, and PSB’s have this kind of isolation. Most if not all others are not as good, offering fairly poor LF isolation. All of the ANC’s also have the advantage of being acoustically tuned with EQ to have an unbelievably flat response. These have the flattest response of any type of headphones. I never liked the sound of these in the past, but things are different today. They are actually real contenders as true audiophile headphones. I still prefer open backed over the ear types for their soundstage, but I have to admit that tonally these are excellent. And with modern DSP from companies like DIRAC, these can provide really convincing 3D sound.