Just join this forum and am ready to learn from your experiences. Just out of curiosity, show of hands so to speak, I was wondering how many of you have had an audiogram test done recently? I think this is an area too often neglected by audio enthusiasts. Our ears just like our eyes degrade with time. Heck! My son has been wearing glasses since he was 12. Food for thought. If the ears are not 20/20 so to speak, should we be wearing acoustic glasses? We would have no problems wearing spectacles to read or watch TV, yet how many people wears hearing aids to listen to music? How good are the equipment reviewers’ ears? Shouldn’t that be part of the equation? They often show us how well calibrated their test equipments are but what about their ears? So let me ask the question again: have you checked yours recently?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Hello forum members
- Thread starter Spenav
- Start date
Hi there. Welcome to the forum. I had an audiogram done a couple of years ago. Disappointed that they would only test to 8 kHz. They said the hospital in the next town over goes to higher frequencies but they only use that for Cancer patients and such.
The test results showed me to have age related nerve damage (i.e. typical hearing loss) at high frequencies. But in mid-frequencies, my hearing is better than the average population.
The test results showed me to have age related nerve damage (i.e. typical hearing loss) at high frequencies. But in mid-frequencies, my hearing is better than the average population.
Same same. Audiologist tested me a couple months ago up to 8khz, and I was pretty okay for a 54-year-old. I know from other means, however, that I've got almost nothing above 12khz. Interestingly, my channel imbalance (right ear deficit) doesn't show up on testing, even though I have to compensate very obviously to get a phantom center from stereo speakers and headphones. I discovered that issue at age 15, and it's never changed. No idea what's going on there. HRTF maybe? Bone conductivity issue? Who knows.
BTW, I was stunned by the pure bone conductivity hearing test they did to me. I had no idea I could hear that way! I couldn't localize sound, but I sure could hear.
BTW, I was stunned by the pure bone conductivity hearing test they did to me. I had no idea I could hear that way! I couldn't localize sound, but I sure could hear.
Welcome aboard , i got mine tested in 2017, again to 8k as that's your critical hearing from a function pov ( that's what's I was told anyway) .
Mine was as good as it can be , comparable with a 18 year old on their chart though I'm 40 ( was 38 at the time ).
Mine was as good as it can be , comparable with a 18 year old on their chart though I'm 40 ( was 38 at the time ).
You can get headphones that transmit sound through your cheek bones now apparently, iv not tried them but they are said to be fairly good for music.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
An audiogram indeed only extends to 8kHz, bone conduction is only measured to 4kHz or 6kHz.
The guy I visited could use higher frequencies (and did on my request) but it is not calibrated so not logged in the printout either.
What it tells is how much the lower hearing limit deviates from the reference and at which frequency the lowest limit is.
This, however, is not the same as the frequency limit at say 80dB SPL or 60dB compared to a 1kHz reference.
For listening to music this is much more important. It does not have a clear relation to the lower hearing limit (there is some relation of course but not 1:1)
So yes, an audiogram is of importance to know how your sensitivity plummeted and if there are weird dips below 8kHz.
Alas it won't reveal much about audio reproduction at normal levels.
The guy I visited could use higher frequencies (and did on my request) but it is not calibrated so not logged in the printout either.
What it tells is how much the lower hearing limit deviates from the reference and at which frequency the lowest limit is.
This, however, is not the same as the frequency limit at say 80dB SPL or 60dB compared to a 1kHz reference.
For listening to music this is much more important. It does not have a clear relation to the lower hearing limit (there is some relation of course but not 1:1)
So yes, an audiogram is of importance to know how your sensitivity plummeted and if there are weird dips below 8kHz.
Alas it won't reveal much about audio reproduction at normal levels.
- Thread Starter
- #8
Thanks all for sharing. My experience was similar to most and has humbled me. Knowing that we don’t necessarily hear the same has made me more tolerant of others’ choices. It’s amazing that we all can appreciate music the same though. That’s why I always pick my equipment based on what I hear and whether it is pleasing to me. I hope to share the little experience that I have acquired over the years with you and try my best to bring value to the forum.
Similar threads
