My my my what a bunch of bitchy grumpy old farts.

I sounded like the guy was making a reasonable subject for discussion and he gets blasted. Oh well,

I use DC 13.4 and I like em, I am sure that ANR DCs would be even better but that's money I ain't got.

I can say that I ran a dredge where the operator seat was about thirty inches above the turbo of a screamin Detroit 8V71 and the sound protection was one sheet of .125 steel. One of the guys had a set of Bose ANR headsets without even the full cup on them and GOD they made a wonderful difference. Ear plugs and passive muffs would deaden the noise but a 12 hr shift was painful. With the Bose ANRs playing nice music it was tolerable.

All in all if I had the bucks I would have ANR sets in the plane, probably DCs. They might not be worth it just for the actual hearing protection but would be for the comfort over the long haul.

P.S. I have hearing loss, especially in the high end and tinnitus and I sure wish I didn't.

Lighten up guys and be nice to each other, this ain't politics ya know.

I have a David Clark ANC and a Lightspeed Zulu, but for summer flying I took aviation consumers advice and got quiet technologies in the ear headset: http://www.quiettechnologies.com/store/ ... ducts_id=7

They are hands down the best thing I've ever flown with, and at $360 the price is right. They are quiet, no clamping pressure, and the sound is great. They are not great for passengers because of the ear plug aspects, but If I could do it again I would buy a set as my main headset.

For winter I'll still fly with the Zulus, probably.

-Brad

I've got to second the hearing loss, and fatigue bit. I originally flew with a pair of DC's. They were functional and worked great - I still have a pair for my passengers. I couldn't believe the difference in fatigue level though after switching to some Lightspeed Zulus. With the Zulus, I find that I become tired much less quickly while flying, and feel significantly better afterwards. I also find it easier to understand others over the radio. When considering that I'm treating my hearing better, and am more "sharp" while flying due to less fatigue, I just can't see a reason why not to go with an ANR headset. As for particular models, find what fits your head, and your budget...

I think the car analogy is pretty good except that it is not fair to a Kia and gives too much credit to a BMW. The difference between my Zulu (or Bose or a couple other high quality anc headsets) and a $200 head set is WAY more than between a Kia and a Beemer. To be frank, I might be the kind of guy who would buy a Kia (I am considering a Hyundai) but would never scrimp on a headset. I consider it a tool of my trade as a professional pilot. My fatigue level after hours in the cockpit is less with a good headset, my hearing damage is lessened by using one, my enjoyment of flying is greater and I may even be safer as I am able to understand clearances better. I believe trying to save money this way is a false economy in absolute terms and in relative terms, when you consider the overall cost of flying, it makes no real difference in the hourly cost of owning an aircraft. I get to deduct my headsets anyway, as a business expense, and usually buy a new one every 3-4 years as they wear out.

But hey...go for it...audiologist need work too.

Growing up on a farm...

....in the 50's and 60's I probably put about 4,000 astraddle a Farmall 450 and 560 tractors. No cabin, no hearing protection....just a blast of roaring power pounding my ears. Then there was over 30,000 hours in aircraft. From C-150's and Twin Beeches to screaming Garrett and Rolls Royce turboprops....another 36 years in the pointy nose of jetliners. Ever sat in the cockpit of a B-727 at Mach 90? Believe me pilots had to scream to be heard! Much of that flying was done before anyone ever thought about hearing protection. All old pilots were nearly deaf...just part of the job description. By the time pilots started taking hearing loss seriously I had suffered a good amount of losss.

10 years ago I bought a Bose headset to replace my passive David Clark. I could not believe the difference the Bose made when flying my open cockpit Pitts and Skybolt. I have realized less benefit with the Maule over the past 9 years. Honestly am not impressed with the Bose on the longer flights. I find the Bose to be uncomfortable and actually recieve the same "quiet" with the old David Clark and earplugs. The real advantage of the Bose, for me, is the clarity of radio transmissions. So bottom line is ....I would not spend $850.00 for a Bose again(I got a 15% discount through the airline.) I cannot speak to the other noise canceling headsets as I've never tried them. In my opinion....the Bose is not worth the price.

Also....I've been told that the damage to the ear continues even with noise cancelling headsets. It is only that one does not "hear" the loud noise. Anyone know anything about that?

"One mans opinion....your milage may vary.

Bob

To the original poster: nice job measuring the real world. As a retired engineer, I appreciate getting real data. Even if it was collected with a non calibrated instrument, the relative measure is most useful anyway. I like to feel I get the most for my money. I view money as part of my life energy. I expended a considerable bit of my life working, so it is useful to me to make decisions on what to spend my "life's energy" on.

But, there is more than pure numbers to deciding what to get. Some folks like little alligators on their tee shirts. On the other hand, I read a true story about a couple that lived on the street, and put their kids through hell by living in abject poverty. When they died, the kids found out the old folks had a couple million in the bank. Different strokes for different folks. Some like to buy with their heart, others with a colder analytical approach.

Me, I've got some $100 wonders that look like a ripoff of DCs. They "may clamp my head like a vice", but I can wear them for 5 or 6 hours without complaint, and I wear glasses. Of course, I can't hear shit for three days after flying, but I've been able to fly nearly 50 hours on the difference.

Bob...

it is real simple for us old guys with tinitus to assess damage according to my audiologist. If your tinitus sounds worse after an activity you are doing more damage. For myself there is a clear difference between post anc hearing and post passive hearing. I will often wear earplugs too and that helps even more. I too would pay twice as much if I could get even a head set that was quieter.

I have to say that some helmets with tight straps holding the ear phones firmly to my ears also have great effect even without anc...would love to try one of those with anc and see if it would work even better. I would even live with the perceived goofiness of wearing a helmet. Those things aren't cheap either.

Daryl

Thanks Daryl,

Fortunately I do not experience "tinitus" even after long flights with either headset or none. Just have high freq. hearing loss and struggle to "hear" in crowded and noisy environments. After firing the old M-14 a few dozen times in the Army....I was nearly deaf for several hours though even at age 22. No hearing protection at all. If I were a young airman again....I'd use hearing protection for sure.

Oh well for age 64 I need not complain. But we are all different. My best friend is 68, comes from the same background and has excellent hearing. As they say...."If you want to enjoy a long life....chose your parents very carefully." Guess that goes for hearing too.

GENES.

Bob

AvidFlyer wrote:Interesting study. I bought my Dave Clark on Ebay and converted it to ANR using a kit from Headsets Inc. I'm into the whole thing for about $350. I wear a BOSE for my day job and it's not unusual to fly 10-12 hour legs acrosss the ocean to Europe. On a day like that the ANR makes a HUGE difference in your fatigue level at the end of the day. Flying an hour for a $100 hamburger probably not so much.

I did the same they work really good.

As far as the price of Bose and other high $ head sets, it's like walking into a casino, only spend as much $ in as you're willing to loose. (not saying buying ANR's is loosing either)

Here are some questions I've always wondered about regarding the aviation ANR headsets.

Do they all require batteries, or are there any models that use an external power source like the cig lighter, etc.?
What type of batteries do the various models use?
If the batteries go dead, do the speakers still work, or does it become a boat anchor?

Budd Davisson once mentioned in one of his columns that there wasn't much in life that he enjoyed quite so much as things that made a lot of noise. Things like cycling the prop on your T-6 at 250' agl over a tract of homes off the approach end of the runway. Loud cars, loud motorcycles, loud music. I'm the same I guess. Sad to say, I just never grew up.

In my family, my father's side, everybody wears hearing aids. I've got that gene. I got my first pair at the tender age of 49. There isn't much I could have done to change things; or so I like to think. Still, I wear clamp on DC hearing protection when using power tools and other noisy stuff. I hate them, but I don't want to loose any more. My right ear is down 70db at 2K. The left is slightly better. I've always attributed the difference between ears to using my right ear while talking on the telephone.....to my ex wife.

This is a fun thread, we all suffer from an excess of testosterone I think, hence the observation that wheel barrows were invented to force pilots to walk on their hind legs; even the girls. I think the OP's tests were inconclusive at best, argumentative at least. Let's clear one thing up here: each doubling of power equals 3db increase in sound level. The numbers have been all over the place but in at least one sense, trivial. The ear doesn't work like a sound level meter. Honest.

Have you ever noticed that control on your stereo set marked "loudness" or "contour"? It boosts the low frequency output of the program material through the tone control circuit. The human ear is designed (there's another argument) to drop low frequency sound perception at low SPLs. Conversely, as the cochlea wears out for whatever reason, it takes high frequency boost to restore the missing frequencies. All the while maintaining the same over all perceived SPL. So you set your graphic equalizer for a pleasing sound at a given SPL then turn the volume up and you will have to reset the values in order to "hear" the same tonal balance.

Digital noise reduction circuits use a very simple concept and a very complex algorithm to provide a perceived reduction in "non useful" aural information. We all know in principle how that works. Those algorithms have come a long way in the last 20 years or so, but they are limited in what they can do because of the complexity of our ears response to different frequencies at different SPLs. Though my right ear is down 70db at 2K (and gets worse from there) doesn't mean that I need 70db of correction at that frequency. If it did, you can imagine the result. At a normal conversation level in the library I would hear the bass tones of your voice along with plosives and the rumble of traffic outside at something like 70db but the sibilants, breath noises and the ticking of the library clock would be amplified to 140db. That wouldn't be good. It would be very destructive very quickly. As the high frequency levels are raised a few db the ear and brain make adjustments and the down 70db suddenly becomes down 9db or so. Maybe a bit more.

What the hell does all this mean? I have no idea.....well....actually I do, but to continue this over long post is to risk banning by the banned Zane.

I too am reluctant to spend the big bucks but I am becoming enamored of the new offering from Sennheiser. Ideally, because of severe (off the chart severe) cervical stenosis, I would prefer something like a total 60db ear block (like the rockstars use) with some sort of pressure equalizing valve for obvious reasons, and the whole thing hooked up to a bluetooth transmitter programmed by my audiologist.

In the mean time the answer seems obvious, even trivial, use what lets you hear the best dude.

Dan

I have a simple question for those who actually know a bit about hearing loss. If one wears ear plugs throughout his or her day, will their hearing show improvement? I ask this because people who are not exposed to modern noise (remote peoples) have better hearing.

Apologies for yesterday.

ANR is a luxury, and something that can only really be experienced by trying a best-of-breed headset. You cannot rationalize it based on data. You have to simply try one of the best models-- and not all ANR are created equal-- and decide if $500-900 is worth your comfort. What DOES clarity sound like? My earlier point, possibly obscured, was simply that had you given the Zulu a try you'd likely not be endeavoring to rationalize anything. You may as well post "What's the rationale for long legged large chested blondes?"

Zane wrote: You may as well post "What's the rationale for long legged large chested blondes?" Of course if you've never tried one of those either, you may as well refrain. Zulus only cost $900 once.

The blond will cost a boat load more than the headset. Buy the headset, rent the blond. Win win all the way around!

TomKatz wrote:I have a simple question for those who actually know a bit about hearing loss. If one wears ear plugs throughout his or her day, will their hearing show improvement? I ask this because people who are not exposed to modern noise (remote peoples) have better hearing.

Yes and no. How you like that for a cop out.

The "experts" at OSHA have set standards, (one size fits all, kinda like FAA). Certain limited exposures will heal. Cross over the line, however and you risk permanent damage.

I truly abused my ears. Guns, guitars, motorcycles, airplanes, machine tools, and long term industrial exposure. My father on the other hand did none of those things, yet we had more or less the same hearing loss profile. It's progressive. I'm likely to live in a far more silent world a few years hence than I do today. I inherited it from Dad, along with my good looks and superior intellect.

Zane, no apology needed, just work on your sarcasm vocabulary. It's far more effective and more fun to boot.

Today I was able to work the phrase "extra douchbaggy" into a conversation with an employee. Keep em coming Zane

Jim

Try out a standard Bose, then try the new Bose A20.
Night and day improvement.
Bose about $1000 for two ears.
Decent Hearing Aid for one ear $2700+, $5400 for two ears.
Simple calculation. Ears are a one time deal for life.

Scouter wrote:Today I was able to work the phrase "extra douchbaggy" into a conversation with an employee. Keep em coming Zane

Jim

Oh yeah.

littlewheelinback wrote:I think the car analogy is pretty good except that it is not fair to a Kia and gives too much credit to a BMW. The difference between my Zulu (or Bose or a couple other high quality anc headsets) and a $200 head set is WAY more than between a Kia and a Beemer.

perhaps I should of used BMW and 78' pinto