Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Looking for quality ear protection


Recommended Posts

I think the issue with all day comfort is to take breaks, take the big muffs off but keep the plugs in when you can get off range. 

 

My big issue is with my clays gun and some scoped ARs, the muffs interfere with my cheek weld or the stock breaks the ear muff seal enough to let bad noise in. I've been trying to train myself to use a head position that alleviates this but sometimes it's unavoidable.

 

Only been shooting frequently for past 7-8 years so my hearing loss is from car stereos and standing next to speakers at concerts, industrial machinery and general stupidity. Getting my first hearing aids on Tuesday. $4000 and I'm 60. 

 

What happens is you can still hear stuff fine but once there is background noise or poor sound quality you miss things. Lots of movies are muddled and have music behind the dialogue and that's really tough. Same with barroom and restaurant conversations with lots of bustling. 

Edited by Frankly
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Malarky112 said:

Let me ask you this. Some ppl have stated the electronics don’t shut down fast enough. 
Now please correct me if I’m wrong. When I’m wearing electronic muffs I am still wearing muffs...any sound I hear is digitally enhanced coming in thru a speaker. That speaker is not nearly as loud as a gun shot, and only as loud as I have the volume turned to. 
So even if it doesn’t shut off for the 1st 1/2 second of a gunshot, I’m only hearing that gunshot thru the speaker, which is not turned up very loud. 

So in that sense I really shouldn’t get any more noise to my ear than I would with just muffs and no electronics, correct? 

And this has been today’s practical example of why you shouldn’t believe everything you see on Enos. 😂 (Yes, you’re correct)

Edited by Silverscooby27
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2020 at 11:02 AM, Sarge said:

Always interesting to read something that sounds pretty factual but all I know is I wore foam ear plugs for years in the Army. Yes they were good plugs that I bought and yes I put them in correctly. I still ended up with hearing loss and ringing in my ears upon retirement. They do virtually nothing for me when shooting Open except make my ears ring even more.

  I also had custom passive plugs made when I first started USPSA. They are great for anything but Open and 5.56. Again make my ears ring like the foamies.
  I use electronic Peltor tactical pros with gel pads . Whatever the electronics are rated at “technically” I don’t know. But they are great at canceling and amplifying as needed. And my ears feel just as good as when I wear passive peltors rated at 33db except I can hear.😂

cause ear plugs only make it sound quieter.  Better than nothing. But IAW my audiologist, Muffs that cover your ears protect you8r ears much better from hearing loss do to constant noise exposure. Put your finger under your ear lobe and push into your skull, Feel that soft spot ? a flap of skin covering a direct line to your inner ear. Muffs cover that. Plugs dont.
Any was as  a marine engineer I work in high noise areas, and have to get hearing tests every year, and thats how the doctor explained it to me.|
I am a plugs and muff guy. I wear plugs where noise may happen.. Then double with muffs when I Know its gonna be loud.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Silverscooby27 said:
10 hours ago, Malarky112 said:

Let me ask you this. Some ppl have stated the electronics don’t shut down fast enough. 
Now please correct me if I’m wrong. When I’m wearing electronic muffs I am still wearing muffs...any sound I hear is digitally enhanced coming in thru a speaker. That speaker is not nearly as loud as a gun shot, and only as loud as I have the volume turned to. 
So even if it doesn’t shut off for the 1st 1/2 second of a gunshot, I’m only hearing that gunshot thru the speaker, which is not turned up very loud. 

So in that sense I really shouldn’t get any more noise to my ear than I would with just muffs and no electronics, correct? 

And this has been today’s practical example of why you shouldn’t believe everything you see on Enos. 😂 (Yes, you’re correct)

 

He, and you, are most certainly not correct.  Your volume setting has no bearing at all on anything under 85dB.  Your electronic muffs are essentially microphones with an attenuation circuit built in to limit loud sounds to 85dB.  So if the muffs attack time is 1/2 second as the original questioner posited, you hear the FULL dB level of the report until the attack time is reached.  After that you only hear 85dB of the original sound.  The 20-30 millisecond attack times of analog muffs are not fast enough to prevent you from hearing the initial wave front at full volume.  Electronics with much faster attack (reaction) times are better.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zzt said:

 

He, and you, are most certainly not correct.  Your volume setting has no bearing at all on anything under 85dB.  Your electronic muffs are essentially microphones with an attenuation circuit built in to limit loud sounds to 85dB.  So if the muffs attack time is 1/2 second as the original questioner posited, you hear the FULL dB level of the report until the attack time is reached.  After that you only hear 85dB of the original sound.  The 20-30 millisecond attack times of analog muffs are not fast enough to prevent you from hearing the initial wave front at full volume.  Electronics with much faster attack (reaction) times are better.

 

Isn’t that assuming that the electronic muffs’ speaker is capable of producing said “full volume”?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m suffering from hearing loss from watching match videos with my headphones, where the gun shot noises aren’t being attenuated quickly enough.

 

🤨

Link to post
Share on other sites
I’m suffering from hearing loss from watching match videos with my headphones, where the gun shot noises aren’t being attenuated quickly enough.

I bought a really good set of headphones and I’m in the same boat. Now I can only watch videos of Prod and CO shooters. No more Open shooter videos for me!

 

d1a448e172b22bad5b724e04b8f614d0.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Most of this is exactly spot on... Except, the truth of the matter is ALL currently available electronic ear pro is bad, and even a response time of 1 to 5 milliseconds is way too slow to prevent the transient sounds (like a snare drum crack, or a gunshot report) from causing hearing damage. All electronic ear pro works off of electronic and/or digital compression/limiting to do what they do, except the compression/limiting algorithms they incorporate are basically s**t compared to what they'd have to be to truly "catch" a transient sound before it could do any damage. It really doesn't matter what you spend on electronic ear pro either, whether $50 for the Impact Sports you see at every match, or $350+ on the latest bluetooth enabled rechargeable earbuds, they're all a bit gimmicky in a way, since they might let you hear range commands easier or allow you to pump tunes from you iPhone into them, but none of that is actually protecting your hearing as best as possible.

 

If you really want to protect your hearing you want PASSIVE ear pro, the electronic stuff just isn't fast enough.

 

Just for good measure so I don't have to deal with reading any more insanity: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6651885/

"The results of the assessment of level-dependent hearing protectors demonstrated that it is possible to adequately protect the hearing of a shooting instructor who is at an indoor shooting range when using protectors of this type. It is possible to choose hearing protectors, both earmuffs and earplugs, that will sufficiently reduce the impulse noise to which the instructor is exposed."

Edited by Camhabib
Link to post
Share on other sites
  He, and you, are most certainly not correct.  Your volume setting has no bearing at all on anything under 85dB.  Your electronic muffs are essentially microphones with an attenuation circuit built in to limit loud sounds to 85dB.  So if the muffs attack time is 1/2 second as the original questioner posited, you hear the FULL dB level of the report until the attack time is reached.  After that you only hear 85dB of the original sound.  The 20-30 millisecond attack times of analog muffs are not fast enough to prevent you from hearing the initial wave front at full volume.  Electronics with much faster attack (reaction) times are better.  

 

 

 

Oy vey.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Camhabib said:

 

Oy vey.

 

Oy vey yourself.  My expertise and $1700 audio analyzer says the study you posted above in not necessarily;y accurate in all aspects.  I can tell you that in one venue I shoot at, there is no level of hearing protection an RO can wear that protects their hearing with Open guns.

 

I'll also note that I would love to know what the H9 earplugs were.  I want some.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zzt said:
 
Oy vey yourself.  My expertise and $1700 audio analyzer says the study you posted above in not necessarily;y accurate in all aspects.  I can tell you that in one venue I shoot at, there is no level of hearing protection an RO can wear that protects their hearing with Open guns.
 
I'll also note that I would love to know what the H9 earplugs were.  I want some.


Lol, yes, what’s a peer reviewed journal article from a research laboratory in an impact factor rated journal to your analyzer. Crazy how we can find ear protection against jets taking off from aircraft carriers but not open guns, which apparently “no level of hearing protection” could suffice. 

 

Is it a full moon out or something?

Edited by Camhabib
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a custom set made a few years ago at the Grand. It was the best $60 I've ever spent on hearing protection. They are comfortable for an entire match. I do pop one out a little for stage briefings and if I am scoring so I can hear them better.  I also don't squad with open shooters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, OdinIII said:

Just wanted to chime in again and warn everyone to avoid instructional welding videos. You can burn your eyes.

Not just your eyes! Arc welding produces lots of UV light, and will badly burn any exposed skin in relatively short order. Be sure to cover those arms!

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Camhabib said:

Crazy how we can find ear protection against jets taking off from aircraft carriers but not open guns, which apparently “no level of hearing protection” could suffice. 

 

Taken out of context.  Different types of sounds with different impulses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Camhabib said:


Lol, yes, what’s a peer reviewed journal article from a research laboratory in an impact factor rated journal to your analyzer. Crazy how we can find ear protection against jets taking off from aircraft carriers but not open guns, which apparently “no level of hearing protection” could suffice. 

 

Is it a full moon out or something?

Have you been on a flight deck of an aircraft carrier launching jets during flight ops? The flight deck crew don’t use electronic muffs or plugs. They use the US Navy Flight Deck Crewman Sound Attenuating Helmet Assembly which we call “Cranial” because it squeezes our cranium. There are two type of these, one is wired for used with sound powdered phones used for communications with the damage control lockers and backup to the electronic Radio Cranial also known as Hydra Helmet while the other is passive. Majority of the flight deck crew wear the passive ones and this is the main reason why they use hand signals to communicate with each during flight ops. 

 

The only people using electronic muffs (Radio Cranial or Hydra Helmet) is the LSO (Landing Signal Officer) so he can talk to the people (especially Air Boss And Mini Boss who directs flight deck ops) in the island.

 

In my 21 years in the Navy working with jet engines, never had I been issued with an electronic ear muff or plug other than the ones I talked about above.
 

So I guess it’s really a full moon out of something on your end.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you been on a flight deck of an aircraft carrier launching jets during flight ops? The flight deck crew don’t use electronic muffs or plugs. They use the US Navy Flight Deck Crewman Sound Attenuating Helmet Assembly which we call “Cranial” because it squeezes our cranium. There are two type of these, one is wired for used with sound powdered phones used for communications with the damage control lockers and backup to the electronic Radio Cranial also known as Hydra Helmet while the other is passive. Majority of the flight deck crew wear the passive ones and this is the main reason why they use hand signals to communicate with each during flight ops. 
 
The only people using electronic muffs (Radio Cranial or Hydra Helmet) is the LSO (Landing Signal Officer) so he can talk to the people (especially Air Boss And Mini Boss who directs flight deck ops) in the island.
 
In my 21 years in the Navy working with jet engines, never had I been issued with an electronic ear muff or plug other than the ones I talked about above.
 
So I guess it’s really a full moon out of something on your end.

I can only assume your “years in the navy” left you with a slight reading impediment. I wasn’t speaking about level-dependent heading protectors, but rather commenting on how one (very bright with a $1700 analyzer) user said there is “no level of protection” suitable for an open gun. But sure, please continue about “full moon on my side” (do we need an astronomy lesson next?).
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Camhabib said:


I can only assume your “years in the navy” left you with a slight reading impediment. I wasn’t speaking about level-dependent heading protectors, but rather commenting on how one (very bright with a $1700 analyzer) user said there is “no level of protection” suitable for an open gun. But sure, please continue about “full moon on my side” (do we need an astronomy lesson next?).

No, my service didn’t leave me with a slight reading impediment, rather it allowed me to differentiate between fluff and substance. 
 

You stated how crazy to find ear protection against jets taking off from an aircraft carrier yet when confronted about your experience with subject, you resort to name calling. It’s too obvious that you don’t have a clue or real world experience on what you’re talking about. 
 

Don’t use ear protection against jets taking off from an aircraft analogy if you don’t even have any first hand experience  about them.
 

You talk like you have a lot of experience with it and most knowledgeable on the subject yet can’t even answer my simple question if you have any flight deck experience or not.
 

Francis Bacon once said, “ Words are just like leaves. When they are most abound, much fruit of sense is rarely found.”

Edited by George16
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, George16 said:

No, my service didn’t left me with a slight reading impediment, rather it allowed me to differentiate between fluff and substance. 

 

Pro tip: your point is better illustrated if you correct your post to “leave” not “didn’t left me.”

 

It wasn’t an analogy (which is a comparison) but rather a wild thing called an “example” used to demonstrate that if we can find hearing protection against louder sound, we can find it against a softer sound. Replace “jets” with cell disruptor / homogenizer, industrial machine shop, top fuel dragster, etc. I don’t understand why you’re getting hung up on the particular example I picked but, that seems an issue outside the scope of this discussion.

 

All this is to say, the engineers at 3M, Bose, Honeywell, numerous other companies, and academic labs (of which I posted an journal paper from) all say that, used correctly, level dependent hearing protection is safe. On the other hand, we have some shady at best anecdotal evidence from 2-3 people arguing they aren’t.

Edited by Camhabib
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Camhabib said:

Pro tip: your point is better illustrated if you correct your post to “leave” not “didn’t left me.”

It wasn’t an analogy (which is a comparison) but rather a wild thing called an “example” used to demonstrate that if we can find hearing protection against louder sound, we can find it against a softer sound. Replace “jets” with cell disruptor / homogenizer, industrial machine shop, top fuel dragster, etc. I don’t understand why you’re getting hung up on the particular example I picked but, that seems an issue outside the scope of this discussion.

I am not getting hung up on the example you used. I asked you if you had experience being on a flight deck and you resort to name calling. That simple question can be answered by a yes or no and you can’t even do that.

 

Im done with you. Sorry mods.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, George16 said:

I am not getting hung up on the example you used. I asked you if you had experience being on a flight deck and you resort to name calling. That simple question can be answered by a yes or no and you can’t even do that.

 

Im done with you. Sorry mods.

No, as a doctor, I don't. But I do have a good amount of experience with medicine, which I feel like hearing may have a bit to do with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ChuckS locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...