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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
that sounds strangely like spam I've seen
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
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
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.
...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.