Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Helmet & Headset ponderings

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Helmet & Headset ponderings

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 5:49 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

Mickey Coggins wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

> So...I've been looking at ANR headsets and figure if I'm gonna spend some

> dough, might as well get a good one and only cry once.  I'm sure Bose is

> the best but I can't quite believe the cost/benefit tradeoff is worth the

> $1K price tag.  ...

I have had a pair of Lightspeed 25XL headsets for some time now -- one 

pair since they first came out and the second less than a year later. 

They have been the most unreliable headsets I have ever owned. I have 

had to replace mechanical parts several times and electronics a couple 

of times. I have also had to send each of them back to the factory, one 

once and the other twice. Support has been extremely good and they have 

never charged me for any service or support.

Now the have the peeling black covering on the ear muffs. The ANR no 

longer seems to work properly on either one so they are, once again, 

going back to the factory. I don't think that my next ANR headset will 

come from Lightspeed.

And just so you don't think I am completely down on Lightspeed, I want 

you to know that I now use their low-cost non-ANR headset, the QNR. I 

got this headset to have for passengers but found that it has the best 

passive noise reduction of any headset I have used and it also has the 

best overall sound quality -- real high fidelity.

I have one of just about every manufacturer's non-ANR headset kicking 

around, e.g. David Clark, Flightcom, Sigtronics, Peltor, Softcomm, and 

Telex. I have a pretty good feel for how they all work. (For durability 

and overall comfort it is hard to beat the David Clarks with the Oregon 

Aero Softtop and Ear Seals.) I also have an HGU-33 helmet with the 

Flight Suits earspeakers and the Oregon Aero fit-kit. I love it. Good 

passive noise reduction. I don't think I will opt for ANR.

The best ANR headset I have used, bar none, is the Telex digital ANR. 

The ANR in that headset is *breathtaking*! You turn it on and you 

immediately get ANR like all the other headsets. Then about 10-15 

seconds later the rest of the low-freq noise just goes away, like 

someone has turn down the noise control. The cancellation is so complete 

it is mind boggling. Evidently the DSP in the headset learns the exact 

frequencies of the noise and cancels them exactly. The result is 

astonishing. And Telex knows how to build a headset mechanically so it 

stays together. It is a bit more massive than the Lightspeed but with 

proper cushions there is no reason it won't be comfortable all day long.

And after all that I want to add that I am shying away from ANR. ANR 

only protects against low-frequency noise. That is fine but hearing loss 

comes from mid- and high-frequency noise. Therefore it is the passive 

noise reduction of the headset or helmet that protects your hearing. It 

seems to me that the manufacturers of ANR headsets focus on the noise 

reduction of the ANR at the expense of the overall passive noise 

reduction. As a long-time pilot, shooter, and musician I have developed 

mild tinnitus (ringing in the ears) even tho' I have tried to protect my 

hearing. (I guess I wasn't so careful when I was young and 

invulnerable.) Now I am doing everything I can to keep it from getting 

worse. Good Passive noise reduction is the first thing I look for in a 

headset. The active stuff is just icing on the cake.

Comfort is another big issue for me. I tend to wear headsets for long 

periods. Two or three times a year I fly from California to the Virgin 

Islands and back, six days and 45-50 flight hours for the round trip. I 

can't handle a headset that isn't comfortable to wear for 8 hours. A 

standard David Clark type passive headset with the Oregon Aero Softtop 

and Ear Seals makes for a very comfortable headset with good passive 

noise reduction. Something to think about.

And there is one other thing that I have never seen anyone talk about 

with headsets -- the quality of the microphone. If you fly a noisy 

airplane like a CJ6A, Yak-52, RV-4, etc., you need a *really* good 

noise-canceling microphone. Most mics that come with headsets are not 

particularly good. Sigtronics has a good electret mic specially designed 

for high-noise environments that you can retrofit to almost any headset 

that has the wire-frame type mic boom. I have one on my helmet. It works 

pretty well even in the CJ6A or Yak-52.

The best mic I have used that came on a production headset came from 

Softcomm. The one I have is no longer made but their C-40-20 "Silver 

Fox" seems to be its equivalent.

This is probably more information than you wanted but it may help 

someone else too.

-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

dsvs(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:44 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

(snip)

 	  Quote: 	
		   And after all that I want to add that I am shying away from ANR. ANR 

 only protects against low-frequency noise. That is fine but hearing loss 

 comes from mid- and high-frequency noise. .

 

 -- 

 Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

 brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

 +1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

 

 I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

 - Antoine de Saint-Exupery

 

Brian,

Are you sure about the ANR sets do not work at higher freq?  The ANR process does work equally at any and all frequencies.  Why would the manufacturers choose only the low freq?  I believe that Bose sets may have a more balanced spectrum and offer protection at the normal speedch level freqs.  I will test mine tonight.  Don
	


 	  Quote:

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

deej(at)deej.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:48 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

 	  Quote: 	
		   Mickey Coggins wrote:

   

> 

>

>     

>> So...I've been looking at ANR headsets and figure if I'm gonna spend some

>> dough, might as well get a good one and only cry once.  I'm sure Bose is

>> the best but I can't quite believe the cost/benefit tradeoff is worth the

>> $1K price tag.  ...


	


    FWIW that's what I thought until I tried a set.  Bought a pair of

Bose about

2 years ago and never looked back.  One of the best investments I have made

(aviation-wise) in my opinion.  So far they have been the most comfortable

and best performing headset of any that I have tried.



-Dj

do not archive



-- 

Dj Merrill

Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118

http://econ.duke.edu/~deej/sportsman/



"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an 

airplane."  --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:23 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

dsvs(at)comcast.net wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 (snip)

> And after all that I want to add that I am shying away from ANR. ANR 

> only protects against low-frequency noise. That is fine but hearing loss 

> comes from mid- and high-frequency noise. .

>

> -- 

> Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

> brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

> +1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

>

> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery

>

> Brian,

 Are you sure about the ANR sets do not work at higher freq?  

Yes.

 	  Quote: 	
		   The ANR process does work equally at any and all frequencies.  

Not really. As you go up in frequency the wavelengths get shorter. There

is more of a phase shift between the noise-cancellation pickup (mic in

the earcup) and the noise cancellation transducer. It makes it more and

more difficult to maintain the 180 degree phase cancellation.

 	  Quote: 	
		   Why would the manufacturers choose only the low freq?  

The cancellation gets less as the frequency goes up because the phase

shift away from 180 degrees increases. It is just physics. In addition,

if you don't cut off the signal below the point where phase shift

reaches 90 degrees, the system can become unstable and start to "ring"

and eventuall oscillate (feed back).

 	  Quote: 	
		  I believe that Bose sets may have a more balanced spectrum and offer protection at the normal speedch level freqs.  I will test mine tonight.

It is possible to make it better but it requires more work and better

design. It is $easier$ to get the attenuation passively at the higher

frequencies so that is what most manufacturers do. That may well be the

real reason that the Bose headsets cost $1,000 instead of $350.

Brian

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:30 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

dsvs(at)comcast.net wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Are you sure about the ANR sets do not work at higher freq?  


	


Another reason that many ANR headsets cut off the ANR at about 300Hz is

that they are completely autonomous modules and would attenuate speech

frequencies above that. A good design needs to take into account the

audio signal being fed to the earspeakers from the intercom and audio

panel and *not* attenuate that signal. That requires more $design$

$effort$ also. Cutting off the ANR at 300Hz avoids that problem and

allows the designer to build a cheaper module.



Brian

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:36 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

Good Morning DJ,

 

My experience was similar except that it was my significant other who drove  

the decision. I had a full set of high priced headsets in my Bonanza, but she  

would not wear any of them. 

 

One day at Oshkosh, while walking by the Bose tent, she noted they were  

offering some musical program she wanted to hear. After listening with a  set of 

Bose Xs, she came back to the tent and told me to buy her one of those  because 

that one she would wear. After she had her's for about a year and after  I 

had used it occasionally when she was not onboard, I bought three more of them  

and now have a full set.

 

The Bose Xs are definitely the finest headsets I have ever used.

 

I have always said that if Momma Ain't Happy, Nobody's Happy, but, in this  

case, not only is Momma Happy, so am I!

 

Happy  Skies,



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

Stearman  N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630  985-8503



 

 

Do Not Archive and just a small note. For some reason, this message seems  to 

have developed some large variances in type size. I hope it goes through  OK.

In a message dated 4/19/2006 10:50:38 A.M. Central Standard Time,  

deej(at)deej.net writes:

FWIW that's what I thought until I tried a set.   Bought a pair of

Bose about

2 years ago and never looked back.  One  of the best investments I have made

(aviation-wise) in my opinion.  So  far they have been the most comfortable

and best performing headset of any  that I have tried.



-Dj

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

dsvs(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:43 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

-------------- Original message ----------------------

From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com>

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 dsvs(at)comcast.net wrote:

 

 > Are you sure about the ANR sets do not work at higher freq?  

 

 Another reason that many ANR headsets cut off the ANR at about 300Hz is

 that they are completely autonomous modules and would attenuate speech

 frequencies above that. A good design needs to take into account the

 audio signal being fed to the earspeakers from the intercom and audio

 panel and *not* attenuate that signal. That requires more $design$

 $effort$ also. Cutting off the ANR at 300Hz avoids that problem and

 allows the designer to build a cheaper module.

 

 Brian

 

 

Brian,
	


Thanks for the info.  I think you hit it on the head, that is the reason that the Bose set is much more expensive.  I will check my Bose set tonight if I have the time.  I will check the reading inside the earcup at variopus freqs with the ANR on and off.  I will let you know what I find.  Don 

 	  Quote:

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

retasker(at)optonline.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 6:23 pm Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

Your first answer was correct, but this is plain wrong.  The audio 

signal comes in from an entirely separate source than the noise 

cancellation signal.  There is no reason whatsoever that the cutoff 

frequency has anything to do with the desired audio response.  If you 

have found this to be true with any design then the engineer doing the 

design didn't know what he was doing.  Forty years ago, I couldn't even 

spell ingeneir, now I is one   .

Now, if you are talking about hearing someone talking to you NOT over 

the intercom or airwaves, then, yes, attenuating (noise canceling) 

frequencies in the voice band would make it more difficult to hear 

them.  But definitely NOT so for signals piped in through the phone cord.

Dick Tasker

Brian Lloyd wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

dsvs(at)comcast.net wrote:

>Are you sure about the ANR sets do not work at higher freq?  

>    

>

Another reason that many ANR headsets cut off the ANR at about 300Hz is

that they are completely autonomous modules and would attenuate speech

frequencies above that. A good design needs to take into account the

audio signal being fed to the earspeakers from the intercom and audio

panel and *not* attenuate that signal. That requires more $design$

$effort$ also. Cutting off the ANR at 300Hz avoids that problem and

allows the designer to build a cheaper module.

Brian

-- 

Please Note: 

No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message.  We do concede, however,

that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.

--

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:16 am Post subject: Helmet & Headset ponderings

Richard E. Tasker wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Your first answer was correct, but this is plain wrong.  The audio 

 signal comes in from an entirely separate source than the noise 

 cancellation signal.  There is no reason whatsoever that the cutoff 

 frequency has anything to do with the desired audio response.  If you

 have found this to be true with any design then the engineer doing the 

 design didn't know what he was doing.  


	


Uh, perhaps. Sometimes you can get a lot of consistency and stability by 

limiting the bandwidth of your servo.



 	  Quote: 	
		   Now, if you are talking about hearing someone talking to you NOT over 

 the intercom or airwaves, then, yes, attenuating (noise canceling) 

 frequencies in the voice band would make it more difficult to hear 

 them.  But definitely NOT so for signals piped in through the phone cord.


	


You can drive the main transducer from the audio input but the 

microphone in the ANR is still going to generate an out-of-phase signal 

for that too. The electronics needs to also cancel the desired audio 

signal coming in from the sensing microphone. It is not an easy problem 

and it is made much simpler by just separating the audio bands.



When I was a kid about 10-years-old, I discovered the noise cancellation 

property when I had a microphone, an audio amp, and a headset. If I 

placed the microphone near the earcup of the headset everything got 

deadly silent. It was a cool phenomenon but I didn't quite grasp its 

significance.



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum