Sadly, the truth is if you're too old, then it's no longer loud enough because it was too loud when you were young (me).
Last edited:
-
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!
Music: how loud is loud? (video)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Please correct me if I'm wrong but I have been led to believe (by the Internet so LOL) that current movie mixes on Blu Ray like Tenet have subsonic (below 20Hz) content if you have subwoofers capable of said performance. Obviously, I have not confirmed this and hoping that my Trinnov Altitude16 will be able to analyze the frequency output to verify any such subsonic content.I can't argue with the SPL information with live concerts and that would be relevant if we had digital source files that represent of these concerts to recreate them at home.
There may be some recording that come close but the vast majority do not. Not even close.
Perhaps, OSHA is far more applicable to popular music with highly compressed range.
Dr. Toole might disagree with the harmless of very loud music, with age comes wisdom.
There are recordings that have bass down to 20Hz but when did this become the definition of bass.
A bass guitar produces between 40Hz and 80Hz. Focusing on this frequency is not representative.
Focusing on 20Hz seems like an over emphasis. Unfortunately, it is becoming less relevant even for HT as many movies are delivered with bass limiting applied below 30Hz.
Most of us are listening to digital files, where 0 DBFS defines the maximum possible SPL.
To determine my listening levels and power requirements, I played 0 DBFS 250Hz, 440Hz, 1kHz, and 2kHz at 2.83 volts (measured with a Fluke multimeter). I used both speakers to get a better baseline and all frequencies were consistent.
Since the Salon2s are basically 4 Ohms, I based the spreadsheet where -31 produced 2.83 volts measured 86 dB at my 11 foot listening position.
View attachment 123834
The AHB2 clip indicators (bi-amping) the Salon2s confirm these findings, illuminating at -10 tracks, that like most, have no headroom.
I can't speak for others, but based on my measurements and volume settings, I can assure all here that there are no miraculous power requirements nor are there amazing SPL levels coming from these digital sources. I am in fact, listening to movies at under 100dB from the Salon2s. Subs are doing what subs do best.
- Rich
My friend had a pair of Be Focal speakers that made an awful noise playing Alison Krauss "Lie Awake". He assumed that the bridge Denon amp was responsible and replaced them with AT6000 and the problem persisted until be replaced the speakers with Salon2s.
We were not playing this song at a level where either of us felt it was too loud.
This model was clearly not designed to handle loud female vocals.
Some manufacturers clearly do not place the same emphasis on power handling and output.
I have also demoed speakers, like Monitor Audio, that could not handle Jennifer Warnes "Way down deep" at reasonable levels before bottoming out the woofers.
Your critique of the Focals seems warranted. Limit testing is absolutely reasonable, perhaps Focal should do it as well
- Rich
There are some great titles with very low bass, but the trend from the Major studios has been to start rolling off bass at 30Hz.
You'd expect Godzilla V Kong, as put in Braveheart heavy horse, to "Shake the very ground".
The answer for the bass-heads is found in this thread where equalization is provided per title to restore low/subsonic bass.
(21) Bass EQ for Filtered Movies | Page 881 | AVS Forum
The dotted lines are before applying "restorative" bass equalization.
As you say, there are good titles out there as well.
- Rich
Last edited:
I bristled at several point that have been made in the video that have been fairly well covered.
Unfortunately, A-Weighted standards are becoming more applicable for home listening.
Here the the Apple Airpod reporting up to 90 Db playing Billie Eilish "No Time To Die".
I was in no pain but Apple might be on to something. I suspect this estimation is not skewed by 20Hz coming from my AirPod Pros.
The dynamic range compression has made things worse not better for ear and speaker damage. It makes the average volume level much higher and more constant.
The argument was made that "Audiophiles" must listen to high-SPL because that is the ultimate goal of reproducing the live event.
Let's get serious here, most content is constructed in the lab and most live recordings fall short.
Sure, we can listen to our systems/headphone and fully enjoy them at many volume levels.
If you want to create the live performance illusion, that is best done with multi-channel audio.
Stereo isn't going to do that without hypnosis.
I do not and will not call myself an "Audiophile", my interested in in fidelity to the source.
Once that objective is lost, then everything is subjective and chaos follows.
I have had 4 piece jazz ensembles in my home and have a baby grand piano and, as of yet, I have not heard a recording that can credible recreate this experience. The closest that that is multi-channel concert video and some movies like "Yesterday" and "A Star is Born".
- Rich
Unfortunately, A-Weighted standards are becoming more applicable for home listening.
Here the the Apple Airpod reporting up to 90 Db playing Billie Eilish "No Time To Die".
I was in no pain but Apple might be on to something. I suspect this estimation is not skewed by 20Hz coming from my AirPod Pros.
The dynamic range compression has made things worse not better for ear and speaker damage. It makes the average volume level much higher and more constant.
The argument was made that "Audiophiles" must listen to high-SPL because that is the ultimate goal of reproducing the live event.
Let's get serious here, most content is constructed in the lab and most live recordings fall short.
Sure, we can listen to our systems/headphone and fully enjoy them at many volume levels.
If you want to create the live performance illusion, that is best done with multi-channel audio.
Stereo isn't going to do that without hypnosis.
I do not and will not call myself an "Audiophile", my interested in in fidelity to the source.
Once that objective is lost, then everything is subjective and chaos follows.
I have had 4 piece jazz ensembles in my home and have a baby grand piano and, as of yet, I have not heard a recording that can credible recreate this experience. The closest that that is multi-channel concert video and some movies like "Yesterday" and "A Star is Born".
- Rich
Unfortunately, A-Weighted standards are becoming more applicable for home listening.
Here the the Apple Airpod reporting up to 90 Db playing Billie Eilish "No Time To Die".
Does it mention the weighting anywhere?
No, but their AirPods so hopefully, they are taking that into account. The song itself is uncluttered.
- Rich
Aha! I got it!
Despite the very informative nature of this video, the key statement many chose to take fault with is Amir's assertion in saying (some paraphasing) 'Everybody's dream of THE hi-fi is that it can reproduce the concert or live performance in your home....' The audacity in assuming he speaks for 'all audiophiles'. HAH! Yes, this wrong needs to be righted. I only listen at 75db so you're wrong fake expert!
Despite the very informative nature of this video, the key statement many chose to take fault with is Amir's assertion in saying (some paraphasing) 'Everybody's dream of THE hi-fi is that it can reproduce the concert or live performance in your home....' The audacity in assuming he speaks for 'all audiophiles'. HAH! Yes, this wrong needs to be righted. I only listen at 75db so you're wrong fake expert!
Last edited:
@amirm mentioned the inaccuracy of app driven SPL monitoring devices. He stated that they may underestimate SPLs. However, he used @solderdude analysis to state this case. There is significant data in the medical literature comparing these app driven tools to more technical instruments. I don't think the situation is as dire as @amirm states. HOWEVER, as long as one uses the same app, you could get consistent levels and be able to compare. This is precisely what I did by using Decibel X at Disney Hall and at home. Maybe when I listened to King Crimson at the Greek theatre, the 120 dBs I was measuring was not accurate. But it was dammed loud anyway and there is no way I would try to replicate that SPL at home. But I do this for classical music.
Here is ONE of the papers. They all show that some apps are not very accurate, but I'm snot sure how generalizable the issue is:
https://canadianaudiologist.ca/feature-4/
"When using these apps, it is important to consider the rationale of the sound level measurements. When used as a tool to determine whether or not hearing protection is required or how long it is safe to stay in an environment, the amount of inconsistency between apps and devices is a strong indicator that sound level apps should not be relied on.The utility of cell phone sound level meter apps is found when the user is looking for a general idea of the sound level of an environment, with no noise protection measures dependent on the results acquired. Our data suggest that users should proceed with caution when assessing noise levels using smartphone applications, especially because a number of situations underestimated the noise levels."
Some other relevant literature:
https://asa.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1121/1.4964639
https://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2014/04/09/sound-apps/
Here is ONE of the papers. They all show that some apps are not very accurate, but I'm snot sure how generalizable the issue is:
https://canadianaudiologist.ca/feature-4/
"When using these apps, it is important to consider the rationale of the sound level measurements. When used as a tool to determine whether or not hearing protection is required or how long it is safe to stay in an environment, the amount of inconsistency between apps and devices is a strong indicator that sound level apps should not be relied on.The utility of cell phone sound level meter apps is found when the user is looking for a general idea of the sound level of an environment, with no noise protection measures dependent on the results acquired. Our data suggest that users should proceed with caution when assessing noise levels using smartphone applications, especially because a number of situations underestimated the noise levels."
Some other relevant literature:
https://asa.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1121/1.4964639
https://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2014/04/09/sound-apps/
Last edited:
With a SLM that can record peaks accurately like the ones from B&K we can simultaneously measure Peak and RMS levels. Here is my Bruel & Kjaer Type 2245 SLM playing “School” by Supertramp
Measured at 1 second intervals
For digitally recorded music there is also Bob Katz' K-system for monitoring and metering during production derived from the "theatre standard" (SMPTE RP200).
The reference monitor gain is set such that -20 dBFS RMS pink noise produces 83 dBC (slow) per speaker. According to Katz, this is the commonly preferred SPL for a forte (loud) passage on large monitoring systems (for different playback systems the SPL can vary, however). Since not all music needs 20 dB headroom above forte, the monitor gain can be reduced to increase signal to noise ratio while maintaining the loudness. A 6 dB reduction in monitor gain thus gives forte passages at -14 dBFS rather than -20 dBFS. The K-system specifies how to set the monitor gain according to how much headroom there is to be above forte passages relative to digital full scale, i.e. 0 dBFS. K-20 thus leaves 20 dB of headroom corresponding to monitor gain being set to reference (0 dB), while K-14 leaves only 14 dB of headroom corresponding to monitor gain being set 6 dB below reference (-6 dB).
Since Katz uses the AES-17 standard for dBFS, a 0 dBFS sine wave between 200 Hz and 2 kHz would give a peak SPL of 106 dB per speaker at 0 dB monitor gain. For a coherent wavefront from two speakers, this would give a peak SPL of 112 dB. For low frequencies this may even be higher.
Since, as mentioned above, the SPL for a forte passage can vary with the playback system, for correct calibration, it needs to be determined first. Still, the difference is likely only a couple dB. Thus, for headphones to accurately reproduce very, very loud low frequency sounds in highly dynamical recordings, e.g. a fff bass drum strike in a symphony, it has to have low distortion even at around 110 dB SPL.
The reference monitor gain is set such that -20 dBFS RMS pink noise produces 83 dBC (slow) per speaker. According to Katz, this is the commonly preferred SPL for a forte (loud) passage on large monitoring systems (for different playback systems the SPL can vary, however). Since not all music needs 20 dB headroom above forte, the monitor gain can be reduced to increase signal to noise ratio while maintaining the loudness. A 6 dB reduction in monitor gain thus gives forte passages at -14 dBFS rather than -20 dBFS. The K-system specifies how to set the monitor gain according to how much headroom there is to be above forte passages relative to digital full scale, i.e. 0 dBFS. K-20 thus leaves 20 dB of headroom corresponding to monitor gain being set to reference (0 dB), while K-14 leaves only 14 dB of headroom corresponding to monitor gain being set 6 dB below reference (-6 dB).
Since Katz uses the AES-17 standard for dBFS, a 0 dBFS sine wave between 200 Hz and 2 kHz would give a peak SPL of 106 dB per speaker at 0 dB monitor gain. For a coherent wavefront from two speakers, this would give a peak SPL of 112 dB. For low frequencies this may even be higher.
Since, as mentioned above, the SPL for a forte passage can vary with the playback system, for correct calibration, it needs to be determined first. Still, the difference is likely only a couple dB. Thus, for headphones to accurately reproduce very, very loud low frequency sounds in highly dynamical recordings, e.g. a fff bass drum strike in a symphony, it has to have low distortion even at around 110 dB SPL.
DualTriode
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2019
- Messages
- 903
- Likes
- 595
@amirm,
You have the official tools; a 45CA hearing loss test fixture plus an APx555 analyzer and the skills.
You report dB SPL inside the tested headphones frequently.
NIOSH and The CDC are the official people to warn us to the potential hazards of “Noise Induced Hearing Loss in the work place. I agree that NIOSH will not raid your home while you are testing your headphones. dB(A) is the metric used by NIOSH.
How loud is it inside your headphones? You do say that you do listen for several hours every day and that sometimes you do crank it up for full enjoyment.
You have the tools and skills, please tell us what the dB(A) level is inside your headphones. This basic information is missing from your posts. The children at home are following your lead.
I have been teaching Industrial Hygiene topics to Building Trades Apprentices and Journeymen for 30 plus years. Noise Induced Hearing Loss is insidious, it is incremental and cumulative.
I tell my students to use earplugs so they can hear their grandchildren whisper in their ear when they are old.
Amirm turn it down.
You have the official tools; a 45CA hearing loss test fixture plus an APx555 analyzer and the skills.
You report dB SPL inside the tested headphones frequently.
NIOSH and The CDC are the official people to warn us to the potential hazards of “Noise Induced Hearing Loss in the work place. I agree that NIOSH will not raid your home while you are testing your headphones. dB(A) is the metric used by NIOSH.
How loud is it inside your headphones? You do say that you do listen for several hours every day and that sometimes you do crank it up for full enjoyment.
You have the tools and skills, please tell us what the dB(A) level is inside your headphones. This basic information is missing from your posts. The children at home are following your lead.
I have been teaching Industrial Hygiene topics to Building Trades Apprentices and Journeymen for 30 plus years. Noise Induced Hearing Loss is insidious, it is incremental and cumulative.
I tell my students to use earplugs so they can hear their grandchildren whisper in their ear when they are old.
Amirm turn it down.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #134
Driving a car is also dangerous. So I keep telling car reviewers to drive slowly when testing them. No 0 to 60. No 1/4 mile. No maximum braking.
I must say, I have rarely seen people so constantly and so repeatedly ignore everything the topic is about, and keep pushing a different angle.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #135
What business of you all is that? I don't need you to worry about me. Here is the summary slide:
The warning against listening damage is front and center in red. You want to be an advocate for some other messaging? Do your own research, survey and measurements. My job is to review products, not to chase after whatever you want me to chase after.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #136
I don't know and I don't care to find out. Single value dB numbers are one of the worst metrics there are as far as audibility let alone one with built-in ad-hoc filtering. You need to have the full spectrum and analyze that. People don't want to take the time to understand a topic and so gravitate toward such dumb metrics. No wonder then that they can't nail the cause and effect of hearing loss directly. My car says my average driving speed has been something silly like 39 miles/hour. What can you learn from that? Nothing.
This is where another misconception comes from in listening spaces. "My room noise is 45 dB, I listen at 85 dB so I only need 40 dB of dynamic range." Yeh right. That is just 7 bits!!!
You have made your point, you have been heard and answered multiple times. Please move on for the sake of conversation. It is begging to derail the Topic and focus of these professional Scientific Reviews.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,449
- Likes
- 4,818
I was so surprised by some of the things I read here that I dug a bit deeper.
No wonder people have such a different opinion on what is an acceptable exposure depending on the integrator of their chosen standard.
A version of the OHSA standard would lead to underestimating the exposure by a factor of 5.5 compared to the ISO.
OTOH, ISO and NIOSH seem to be in very good agreement.
OHSA is a very strange and lenient standard indeed, as noted by the authors of the paper
Full paper here.
https://www.acoustics.asn.au/conference_proceedings/INTERNOISE2014/papers/p366.pdf
No wonder people have such a different opinion on what is an acceptable exposure depending on the integrator of their chosen standard.
A version of the OHSA standard would lead to underestimating the exposure by a factor of 5.5 compared to the ISO.
OTOH, ISO and NIOSH seem to be in very good agreement.
OHSA is a very strange and lenient standard indeed, as noted by the authors of the paper
Full paper here.
https://www.acoustics.asn.au/conference_proceedings/INTERNOISE2014/papers/p366.pdf
@amirm , I am sorry but I think you are getting too excited. I don't say that ONE number of dBs as reported by my app is the holy grail, for example. Actually, I listen to the entire concert and at points when I know the music will become loud I switch the app on*. It is very disturbing to the audience to have it on all the time, they get upset at me. When I am at home, I can spend more time with the app and have an "opinion" about how loud the music is relative to what I hear in concert. In both instances, it is not one instant, but a "sampling" over time. I will eye ball the levels. Granted. But the eye balling is based on my "sampling" time. Of course, I could be well off. The longer I sample, the closer I think I will get to similar levels.
I do understand that some comments appear hypercritical, but there are other issues at play. For example, I am not sure how the sweep in your headphones is measured. It is my impression that it is not instantaneous peaks and the sweep may be at a constant level, no peaks in the sweep. Correct? It is one thing to measure a stable sweep and other to measure dynamic music playing. Could you clarify this? In music you would have very short peaks that most apps won't capture well but also that may "distort" the perception of loudness we hear.
Please, take these comments as requesting clarification and not as criticism.
* I then also "eyeball" dynamic range. It is easier to sample long peridos BEFORE the concert starts and when people are quiet waiting for the music. This is more relevant with classical music but with rock it is harder. Baseline "sampling" noise is always higher in rock.
I do understand that some comments appear hypercritical, but there are other issues at play. For example, I am not sure how the sweep in your headphones is measured. It is my impression that it is not instantaneous peaks and the sweep may be at a constant level, no peaks in the sweep. Correct? It is one thing to measure a stable sweep and other to measure dynamic music playing. Could you clarify this? In music you would have very short peaks that most apps won't capture well but also that may "distort" the perception of loudness we hear.
Please, take these comments as requesting clarification and not as criticism.
* I then also "eyeball" dynamic range. It is easier to sample long peridos BEFORE the concert starts and when people are quiet waiting for the music. This is more relevant with classical music but with rock it is harder. Baseline "sampling" noise is always higher in rock.
Similar threads
