Slashdot Mirror


EU Recommends Noise Limits On MP3 Players

A story at the BBC notes increasing pressure from the European Commission to set standards that would limit the maximum volume on portable MP3 players. Their reasoning is that it would protect users from damaging their hearing after listening to loud music for extended periods. Quoting: "This follows a report last year warning that up to 10m people in the EU face permanent hearing loss from listening to loud music for prolonged periods. EU experts want the default maximum setting to be 85 decibels, according to BBC One's Politics Show. Users would be able to override this setting to reach a top limit of 100 decibels. ... Some personal players examined in testing facilities have been found to reach 120 decibels, the equivalent of a jet taking off, and no safety default level currently applies, although manufacturers are obliged to print information about risks in the instruction manuals. Modern personal players are seen as more dangerous than stationary players or old-fashioned cassette or disk players because they can store hours of music and are often listened to while in traffic with the volume very high to drown out outside noise."

31 of 360 comments (clear)

  1. But how to do that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But how to do that?
    The effect used to play at 85db is not the same across all headphones.
    The small tiny ones that comes with the player normaly need less effect to reach 85db then if you get some nice big headphones with better sound.

    1. Re:But how to do that? by SpooForBrains · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, what would happen is that the levels would be calibrated either arbitrarily, or with whatever standard earbuds come with the device.

      Those of us that go out and buy decent earphones will then just have to deal with them being too quiet, and no one important enough will give a shit.

      --
      "The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
    2. Re:But how to do that? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      While all our governments are in a nanny-state frame of mind, they might turn their attention more usefully to the kind of amplification given to bands in pubs and clubs, where the dimensions of the places are often small enough to hear the sound of a mouse fart from one side of the room to another, but the bands turn up the volume as high as they can anyway. Or at least in a mathematically inverse ratio to their musical ability.

      It's common to see musicians playing with plugs stuck in their ears so they don't drive themselves stone deaf, while they obviously consider it perfectly OK for them to obliterate the hearing of customers frequenting the place.

      I realise I'm probably a tedious old fart, but I've long been forced to recognise that my hearing is far from what it was when I was a teenager or even in my twenties, and I hold many of these crappy bands to blame.

    3. Re:But how to do that? by areusche · · Score: 4, Informative

      All in all that doesn't matter. This is just another example of ignorant politicians. As a sound designer these dB SPL levels are USELESS with a reference point. 85 dB SPL at 10 meters from a source is a busy room, while 60-65 dB is general room noise. Also 120 dB SPL is the threshold of pain. At or above that our body starts to respond by desensitizing and tinnitius. In incremental doses our body adapts to loud sounds. Limiting headphone output is a farce and manufactures should focus on limiting outside interference. Never use ear buds.

    4. Re:But how to do that? by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Funny

      > While all our governments are in a nanny-state frame of mind...
      > ...
      > ...[the bands] obviously consider it perfectly OK for them to obliterate
      > the hearing of customers frequenting the place.

      Customers who were abducted from the streets outside, dragged into the club, and chained down so that they couldn't escape.

      > ...
      > ...I hold many of these crappy bands to blame.

      Because you couldn't possibly be responsible for your own behavior.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    5. Re:But how to do that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because you couldn't possibly be responsible for your own behavior.

      Funny how telling someone to take responsibility for his own behavior has now become the best way to avoid taking responsibility for one's own actions.

    6. Re:But how to do that? by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > By that logic, this regulation of mp3 player volume level shouldn't exist
      > either because the owners of the players should be responsible for their
      > own actions and turn down the volume.

      You're very quick.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  2. Do what we say, not what we do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hearing loss is bad if it is caused by MP3 players, but it's okay when it's caused by police using crowd control devices against innocent civilians.

    1. Re:Do what we say, not what we do by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.atcsd.com/site/content/view/15/32/

      Known to have been used at the G20, probably other events as well.

    2. Re:Do what we say, not what we do by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not only that, but isn't it equally "hypocritical" that people get fined for speeding, while police cars drive as fast as they need during a chase?

      No, but it is very hypocritical for them to pull you over after they have been speeding for no reason whatsoever. I routinely see these Anointed Ones drive very fast without any flashing lights that signal, "We have an emergency here." I have also had these guys tailgate me in an attempt to get me to drive faster than the speed limit.

      --
      SSC
  3. Wrong approach entirely by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    A technical problem requires a technical solution.

    Instead of forcing media player manufacturers to implement a volume limiter, just force them to include a jamming frequency and allow third parties to sell jammers. When a person feels that someone's music is intruding on their personal space (in a bus, on a train, or anywhere that people are in close contact), a single button press could send a piercing squeal right through whatever audio the earbud guy had playing.

    This has two benefits. First, if there are multiple people around and it is difficult to determine who is listening loudly, this gets all of them in one shot. Second, if a person's earbuds are so loud that the sound is invading someone else's personal space, the brief tone should be enough to put their eardrums out permanently.

    1. Re:Wrong approach entirely by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The issue here is not the ambient noise produced by the earphones, but the damage to the listener.

      You're not making any sense!

      Imagine you're a car, and you want to put the wrong kind of gas in your tank.

      That's a much better explanation, thanks!

    2. Re:Wrong approach entirely by hedwards · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If they're really concerned about deafness, they'd ban companies like Apple from including those crappy ear buds that everybody seems to have to wear. The poor fit and low quality virtually assure that the volume gets bumped up way higher than it needs to be.

      Personally, I like my shure e2c, sure they're expensive, but you don't need to spend a lot of money, just get a earbud that provides for a proper seal in the ear. I can have my volume turned down pretty much all the way on the bus, and I can still barely hear the noise from the rest of the bus.

  4. Better Headphones by secondsun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since we are going the consumer protect route, wouldn't it be better for headphones/ear buds to require noise cancelling technologies so the music doesn't have to be turned up as high?

    That would make it harder to hear things while driving, but you shouldn't have headphones in while driving.

    --
    There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
    1. Re:Better Headphones by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Besides, if hearing is your main truck avoidance mechanism, you've got other problems.

      People have been killed by trains because their walkmans (yes - it was happening even back then) were too loud. That's why some places have banned the use of ANY earphone-equipped music player when driving a car or riding a bicycle. And when you're driving, hearing is an important part of your awareness - not only for that "slightly odd mechanical noise" that might signal trouble down the road, but also such things as the noise-generating grooves along the right shoulder to warn people that they're straying off the road (or to wake them up if they're drowsing off), and the sound of the motorcycle or car that just pulled into your blind spot.

    2. Re:Better Headphones by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The reason I mentioned the ban on headphones while driving or riding a bike was because of the aforementioned incident where someone was killed by a train because they didn't hear it is because it happened 5 minutes from where I live.

      Banning (and then fining) stupidity works as a form of user education, because stupid people get caught, then bitch and moan to everyone about how it's so *unfair" - while everyone else goes "don't you think it's pretty stupid what you did?" It also gives parents a fallback, instead of just having to say "because I told you to!" for things like "wear your bicycle helmet" and "put on your seatbelt."

      It's the same for drunken driving. Here it's a criminal offense and can get you up to 10 years in jail; we heavily advertise this fact during holiday periods, so people at parties feel they have more support when they demand that a drunk guest hand over their keys.

      Laws against stupidity aren't there toi help the stupid - they're too stupid - they're there for the rest of us. A ban on "too loud headsets" will help reduce the second-hand noise everyone else hears while some idiot is blasting their brains out.

  5. Re:say what? by eqisow · · Score: 3, Informative

    On the flip side, there are also a lot of headphones with high impedance? Portable players can't even push many headphones without an external amp as it is. Given the vast array of headphones available, it's impossible to determine what 100dB really is. If they limit it to 100db from the stock earbuds, for example, I'll barely be able to hear my full size 300 Ohm impedance Sennheisers.

  6. What about the headphones by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 3, Informative

    The power delivered to the ears depends on the headphones. I don't know how they plan to do anything meaningful here, they would have to set the limit based on the most "powerful" headphones, which means that the lesser ones will be inaudible. I already had that kind of problem on Nokia phones, you can't hear for shit with them, the max volume is ridiculously low, esp. with their utterly failtastic brand headphones with their annoying 2.5mm jacks. I'm certain nobody will harm their eardrums with that, but I'm equally certain that I'm not buying a Nokia ever again to listen to podcasts.

    And BTW, it's not noise moronmitter, it's power. You can have lots of noise in very low power.

  7. Forget disabled users... by Manip · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have very bad hearing, have done since I was a kid (even had surgery to correct it). I listen to music roughly 10-15% louder than most of my peers. In a noisy room louder still. If they limit volume on my MP3 player will I have to hack it in order to listen to it at a reasonable volume for me?

  8. Wish they would regulate TV channels first. by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My music usually doesn't surprise me with sudden shifts of maximum volume. But every time a program switches to commercial on TV, the max volume is a shit load louder and with more commercials than ever before that means fiddling with the remote every other minute. It wasn't always this way and is way annoying.

    1. Re:Wish they would regulate TV channels first. by Hurricane78 · · Score: 4, Informative

      So why do you still watch TV in the first place? Go to eztv.it, or btjunkie.org, and let the stuff download on your home server. Fire-and-forget style. I even download whole shows. All series.

      It’s like a Tivo. Only that it’s free, and people manually removed the ads for you. :)

      I still use a remote and a big screen. Just that they are attached to my PC. (And that the screen is 9 feet wide and the sound is 5.1 :)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  9. What next? by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 3, Funny

    EU regs on the maximum roughness of toilet paper?

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  10. And how will this work? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The volume that you get out of phones depends on the voltage sent to the phones, which the volume dial regulates, but also the impedance and sensitivity of the phones, which it can't. So whatever limit you set won't work in all cases. If you limit it to 85dB for ultra efficient phones like the Ultimate Ears UE5s (21 ohms, 119dB/mw) it will be extremely silent on Sennheiser 580s (300 ohms, 97dB/mw). Likewise set the limit on the Sennheisers, and the UEs would still be able to go to extremely excessive volumes.

    This just can't be done. Unless you force players to accept only a certain headphone, you can't limit the output in this manner. The range of headphone is extremely wide. With speakers this is mildly feasible since most speakers are 8 ohms (though there are plenty of 4 ohm ones, and some 12 or higher) and generally in the range of 85-90dB/watt (though there are speakers over 100dB/watt). However with headphones the variation is too much.

    This will do nothing useful.

  11. The problem COULD be elsewhere.. by MindPrison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    many of my peers are listening to VERY loud music at the clubs, in their home, in their cars - with ridiculous oversized stereos etc. I'm pretty sure that the MP3 players alone won't make a difference at all.

    I'm in my 40's now, and I've been listening to MP3 players (including the first Walkmans/MiniDisc Players) since the beginning of my childhood, more than others...because I wasn't allowed to play loud music, and I found a great personal "peace" in listening to these - as loud as I wanted - wherever I wanted, any time.

    This never damaged my hearing in any way, I've had my hearing checked regularly, and guess what - despite always using headphones - yes - even today...to avoid problems with my neighbors - I still hear like a 20 year old. Responsive at 18 khz or better, while my peers - can't even detect a 15 khz tone, and they always play loud music on their speakers...which I don't even have.

    Go figure...

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  12. I travel on the Tube to work by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's a pity the EU doesn't apply noise limits to public transport. The Victoria Line of the London Underground regularly hits 100dB. Travel on it to work every day for five years and your hearing will be permanently fucked up by it. Like mine.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  13. +1, funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    SkullCandy? Really guys? Do yourself a favor and go pick up a pair of Sennheiser CX-300 II's. They will blow what you have away and only cost ~$35. SkullCandy is overpriced trash.

  14. Nanny state by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since when is a government in charge of proper parenting? Have we now delegated "common sense" to bureaucrats?

    I certainly remember my parents warning me of the dangers of listening to loud music. I have warned my children. Because children rarely listen, I often have to reinforce this warning, and even take their iPods away when I catch them. This is called parenting. It's not 100% successful. My children are not drilled soldiers and so they don't always listen to me. That's normal. I didn't always listen to my parents, either. However it's my job to keep trying.

          The possibilities for one human to harm himself or others are limitless. Are we going to have to legislate each one? Every single law a government makes takes away something from the people. Yes it's stupid to deafen yourself by listening to loud music. However PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO BE STUPID. Laws normally help prevent or settle dispute between citizens. It's not right that you play your music on your stereo at full volume in your crowded downtown neighborhood at 3am. Not everyone out of your 400 neighbors is in a partying mood. It's not right that you drive drunk and plow your car into another because of your intoxication. It's not right that everyone in the airplane has to put up with your stench if you haven't quit smoking yet. However who is harmed, apart from yourself, if you wear headphones and crank up the volume?

          The real danger here, I believe, is that sort of legislation that is trying to accomplish one thing - perhaps some legislator is tired of listening to the tinny sounds of people's MP3 players cranked at full volume in public - under the guise of something else - "oh we're doing it to save people from themselves".

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  15. Spam by nten · · Score: 3, Funny

    that sounds strangely like spam I've seen

    --
    refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
  16. Re:Yes, if the opamp can drive them by Ironsides · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think you're off by a bit. Even cheap op-amps can output 100ma. A 10ma limit on 32 ohms would give you a max volume of only 3.2mw. Max voltage output over headphones is typically +/-1v, so max current output should be ~33ma at a minimum.

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  17. What can't I f**king decide for myself? by Raisey-raison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hearing loss is bad if it is caused by MP3 players, but it's okay when it's caused by police using crowd control devices against innocent civilians.

    Yeah the cops get free reign. They also don't seem to care about the ill effects of being beaten up by a cop - really nasty health consequences there.

    Why can't the government get out of my business??? If I choose turn the volume too high - its MY problem. Leave ME alone!!!

    It's just like religion, opposition to abortion and stem cells on the political right - if you don't want to have an overly loud mp3 player, then turn down the volume (for yourself). Leave everyone else alone.

    Another example of the destruction of personal liberty.

  18. Re:Dear government by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...except here's a case where people don't actually know what's good or bad for them because the threshold for pain is higher than the threshold for damage, and it's not the Government coming out ad hoc on this issue, it was ear doctors who specialize in this field who have come out and said this needs to be done.

    What makes me really hopeful about this case is there's a place on earth where science holds sway with politics, not the other way around

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.