Interesting to study the ear frequency response differences for men and women as they decline with age.By 45 women have declined by 6db and the frequency diverges above 500HzOn the other hand 45 year old men have a 7 db greater hearing loss at 4,000 Hz than women.By 60 men need a 12 db louder tweeter than the same aged woman!
Highs that cause young womens ears to bleed are almost inaudible to their sugar daddy uh sorry their uncle.
For players this has serious ramifications for your stereo!
Trying to serve all persuations and ages here [on the forum].
Why the 94 Q45 got pillar mounted tweeters.
Google will point the way.
http://textbookrevolution.org/...l.pdfh ... sh...4.htm
Presbycusis curves for men vs women
-
maxnix
- Posts: 22627
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 8:11 pm
- Car: 1995 Infiniti Q45
1995 Infiniti Q45t
2000 Infiniti Q45
Re: Presbycusis curves for men vs women (Q45tech)
Why I kept old McIntosh speakers with flat but accurate frequency response.Q45tech wrote:Interesting to study the ear frequency response differences for men and women as they decline with age.By 45 women have declined by 6db and the frequency diverges above 500HzOn the other hand 45 year old men have a 7 db greater hearing loss at 4,000 Hz than women.By 60 men need a 12 db louder tweeter than the same aged woman!
Highs that cause young womens ears to bleed are almost inaudible to their sugar daddy uh sorry their uncle.
For players this has serious ramifications for your stereo!
Trying to serve all persuations and ages here [on the forum].
Why the 94 Q45 got pillar mounted tweeters.
Wait until the subwoofer/iPod generation turns 50 and their high frequency reponse @2KHz is down 24dB. At least with my Dad's generation is was from field artillery, not self induced deafness from entertainment devices.
Those are some great facts that categorize hearing loss between age and sex. I belive it's purely generational, though, based on some facts I have seen from different sources.
What everyone doesn't take into consideration when talking about hearing loss is that the ear's natural response curve (fletcher munson curve) actually plays a bigger role than most think. It naturally peaks at about 4000 hz. You hear everything at around 4000hz louder than you do at other frequencies, even if it's just something as simple as you typing to the keyboard. A 6db source at 4khz is percieved to be 10 phons by a human ear.. that's more than twice the apparent loudness (using the 3db-doublling principle) !!Hearing loss doesn't come from listening to something super loud for a little while, it comes from listening to something that is marginally loud for extended periods of time (sometimes years, sometimes our whole lives). The guy who cranks his superloud ear-piercing stereo once a week for a few minutes won't experience the same kind of hearing loss that a guy who blares his stock stereo loud everyday for years will. Throughout the years of our lives, the everyday things we hear have an affect on the loss of our hearing, so it would make sense to assume that both men and women lose hearing at 4khz and form similar presbycusis curves when they get older because our ears have been resonating 4000hz almost twice as loud, but also that the greater hearing loss in men can be attributed to characteristic of the role they played in life during the time period they have lived in. This is assuming that you do not have any abnormal hearing abuse under your belt.I'm not saying that blaring your tweeters for years won't hurt your hearing (it will, VERY much so... and it can bring along HORRIBLE side affects like tinnitus), but that the natural hearing curve forms a natural hearing loss curve as you get older just due to long term hearing loss.... which forms a statistic... which q45tech makes a 1-sided debate-worthy post about without an explanation.. =)
I did a thesis on this exact subject after a year taking classes in the recording studio, and I found that most of the statistics I found were from a generalized group of people -- the "baby boomer" generation that was full of blue collar factory workers and war veterans who had obtained hearing loss from a lifetime working with loud machines and firing guns at enemies. This goes along with what I mentioned earlier about hearing things for your whole life.Look at the lives of the people who form this statistic:-women didn't work, stayed home, weren't exposed to much long term loud noise-men worked in factories, spent their whole lives working next to loud machines, had loud cars, the war vets fired guns thousands of timesIt would generally make sense that the generation of the people who form this statistic would produce deaf mailes and females that were just hard of hearing.
I added a part in my thesis that talked about how the same hearing test results on later generations of people who grew up and lived by different standards and lifestyles would yield completely different results and way different presbycusis curves . I stick by my theory, and in 50 years, I belive that it will hold true.... when both the alice cooper rockers of the 80's and their blaring music are old, and then later on when all the thug niggaz who are piercing their eardrums with their tweeters and bass are in retirement homes...
This is a biiiiig topic among people who have an opinion on it not being attributed to generation and lifestyle, and their opinion is getting in the way of people with results to prove.A quote from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communicable Disorders:Quote »The question of whether this loss may be ascribed to noisy modern living conditions, rather than to natural aging effects, has been controversial, particularly since Samuel Rosen's publication, "Presbycusis Study of a Relatively Noise-Free Population in the Sudan," American Otological Society, Transactions, vol. 50, 1962, pp. 135-152. Rosen discovered almost no signs of presbycusis among the Mabaan tribe of the Sudan and attributed this to their quiet living environment and generally healthy condition. [/quote]
Modified by defrag010 at 2:54 AM 4/24/2006
What everyone doesn't take into consideration when talking about hearing loss is that the ear's natural response curve (fletcher munson curve) actually plays a bigger role than most think. It naturally peaks at about 4000 hz. You hear everything at around 4000hz louder than you do at other frequencies, even if it's just something as simple as you typing to the keyboard. A 6db source at 4khz is percieved to be 10 phons by a human ear.. that's more than twice the apparent loudness (using the 3db-doublling principle) !!Hearing loss doesn't come from listening to something super loud for a little while, it comes from listening to something that is marginally loud for extended periods of time (sometimes years, sometimes our whole lives). The guy who cranks his superloud ear-piercing stereo once a week for a few minutes won't experience the same kind of hearing loss that a guy who blares his stock stereo loud everyday for years will. Throughout the years of our lives, the everyday things we hear have an affect on the loss of our hearing, so it would make sense to assume that both men and women lose hearing at 4khz and form similar presbycusis curves when they get older because our ears have been resonating 4000hz almost twice as loud, but also that the greater hearing loss in men can be attributed to characteristic of the role they played in life during the time period they have lived in. This is assuming that you do not have any abnormal hearing abuse under your belt.I'm not saying that blaring your tweeters for years won't hurt your hearing (it will, VERY much so... and it can bring along HORRIBLE side affects like tinnitus), but that the natural hearing curve forms a natural hearing loss curve as you get older just due to long term hearing loss.... which forms a statistic... which q45tech makes a 1-sided debate-worthy post about without an explanation.. =)
I did a thesis on this exact subject after a year taking classes in the recording studio, and I found that most of the statistics I found were from a generalized group of people -- the "baby boomer" generation that was full of blue collar factory workers and war veterans who had obtained hearing loss from a lifetime working with loud machines and firing guns at enemies. This goes along with what I mentioned earlier about hearing things for your whole life.Look at the lives of the people who form this statistic:-women didn't work, stayed home, weren't exposed to much long term loud noise-men worked in factories, spent their whole lives working next to loud machines, had loud cars, the war vets fired guns thousands of timesIt would generally make sense that the generation of the people who form this statistic would produce deaf mailes and females that were just hard of hearing.
I added a part in my thesis that talked about how the same hearing test results on later generations of people who grew up and lived by different standards and lifestyles would yield completely different results and way different presbycusis curves . I stick by my theory, and in 50 years, I belive that it will hold true.... when both the alice cooper rockers of the 80's and their blaring music are old, and then later on when all the thug niggaz who are piercing their eardrums with their tweeters and bass are in retirement homes...
This is a biiiiig topic among people who have an opinion on it not being attributed to generation and lifestyle, and their opinion is getting in the way of people with results to prove.A quote from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communicable Disorders:Quote »The question of whether this loss may be ascribed to noisy modern living conditions, rather than to natural aging effects, has been controversial, particularly since Samuel Rosen's publication, "Presbycusis Study of a Relatively Noise-Free Population in the Sudan," American Otological Society, Transactions, vol. 50, 1962, pp. 135-152. Rosen discovered almost no signs of presbycusis among the Mabaan tribe of the Sudan and attributed this to their quiet living environment and generally healthy condition. [/quote]
Modified by defrag010 at 2:54 AM 4/24/2006
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
Re: (defrag010)
My point was you need a right left fader for the tweeter and a hearing exam to set the equalizer for you.
I wonder how much of the Bose complaints are from drivers ear response not conforming to the Bose individual spearker equalizations [which will change as the capacitors change with age]?
In this age of customization shouldn't one KNOW their hearing frequency response vs loudness curve and plug in their own unique module to a car stereo.
I wonder how much of the Bose complaints are from drivers ear response not conforming to the Bose individual spearker equalizations [which will change as the capacitors change with age]?
In this age of customization shouldn't one KNOW their hearing frequency response vs loudness curve and plug in their own unique module to a car stereo.
-
maxnix
- Posts: 22627
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 8:11 pm
- Car: 1995 Infiniti Q45
1995 Infiniti Q45t
2000 Infiniti Q45
Re: (defrag010)
It is not. It has been documented for decades.defrag010 wrote:Those are some great facts that categorize hearing loss between age and sex. I belive it's purely generational, though, based on some facts I have seen from different sources.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting the reasearch?
Re: (maxnix)
You even mentioned the iPod generation and your dad's generation, of course hearing loss is generational. With generation comes lifestyle, and the lifestyle you live is directly proportional to the hearing loss you will have as a result.maxnix wrote:It is not. It has been documented for decades.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting the reasearch?
What I tried to explain in what I wrote is the difference between excess hearing loss that is compounded on top of the presbycusis curve you get from old age. Everyone ends up with a presbycusis curve, but how much sound you have encountered throughout your life will compound on top of natural hearing loss and form a completely different hearing loss situation.... and that is where the different life and gender roles of the generations in the past come into play.
I get where you're trying to go with all of this, but it's all very broad, and only digs in skin-deep to a bone-deep problem. There's alot more to hearing loss when listening to music than adjusting tweeters and matching your EQ to a set of numbers (speaker placement, resonant interference inside the vehicle, listening volume, duration of high-volume listening, etc)..IMO, the only thing you should adjust your EQ with is your ear.. that's the best way you will get a feel for your music and how the frequency response curve affects your ear and the overall listening fatigue. As long as you adjust the setup to where it sounds good to you, and you don't have any listening fatigue after long periods of listening, then you're doing good!!Q45tech wrote:My point was you need a right left fader for the tweeter and a hearing exam to set the equalizer for you.
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
Re: (defrag010)
Gene therapy to soften the hardening bones/regrow sensors killed by exteme levels-----------to restore/correct the attenuation..............this should make someone Billions to help put/reduce hearing aid companies out of business.
All our life in prison inmates should be experimented upon. To pay their up keep. China will be glad to do research cheaply!
All our life in prison inmates should be experimented upon. To pay their up keep. China will be glad to do research cheaply!
-
maxnix
- Posts: 22627
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 8:11 pm
- Car: 1995 Infiniti Q45
1995 Infiniti Q45t
2000 Infiniti Q45
Re: (Q45tech)
The point is, the frequency loss vs. age and sex becomes insurmountable as frequency rises, especially in males.Q45tech wrote:My point was you need a right left fader for the tweeter and a hearing exam to set the equalizer for you.
The generational effect is really an environmental cause. People working on the farm in late 19th or early 20th Century America didn't have loud noises continously assaulting them, but neither was their hearing responses accurately profiled.
Re: (maxnix)
Right.. but I belive that if they were profiled, that their hearing loss characteristics would differ from the generation that was profiled (including both the results from males and females)maxnix wrote:The point is, the frequency loss vs. age and sex becomes insurmountable as frequency rises, especially in males.
The generational effect is really an environmental cause. People working on the farm in late 19th or early 20th Century America didn't have loud noises continously assaulting them, but neither was their hearing responses accurately profiled.
