New standards to limit Apple iPod volume in Europe

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 103
    "You are free to do as we tell you"
  • Reply 22 of 103
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by EmC View Post


    This is dumb. Put a warning sticker on the headphones. If people can't make this connection on their own tough. When we start regulating every minor detail of life we lose the ability to make our own decisions.



    Welcome to "The Mob"! This is precisely what Obamacare Protestors that the main street media likes to portray as fanatical lunatics are fearing with more governmental control to their lives, how did you put it... "When we start regulating every minor detail of life we lose the ability to make our own decisions." Or to say it more succinctly, 'More Government Control, Less Freedom!'
  • Reply 23 of 103
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,144member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by postguru View Post


    What we need is LESS government control over what is and is not 'good' for us.

    You cannot effectively control how 'loud' someone's MP3 player is, all this will do is lower the user's enjoyment of their music. As someone else pointed out, the volume of music is totally dependent on the music source - unless the manufacturers have some way of measuring the actual decibel level of each song (and also different 'passages' in that song), there is no way this will do anything other than hurt the user experience.

    I am a 59 year old recording engineer that played in rock bands for 20 years. I also find that the 'stock' Apple earbuds are not loud enough for me to accurately hear all the types of music that I listen to, so I have purchased very expensive headphones just to get the volume that is required for me to hear the music at a level that where I can 'feel' the emotion. As a recording engineer, I can tell you that there are MANY parts in a song that are very rarely heard by the average user because they require good equipment and a decent volume to hear. These parts are purposely recorded and mixed at a subconscious level - they are intended to add to the 'feel' or 'emotion' of a song without taking away from the primary instrumentation. I like to listen to my music at a level that is just barely enough for me to discern these 'hidden' parts, and to do that usually requires a fairly high volume level.



    Now, most of you probably think my eardrums are shot from a lifetime of listening to 'loud' music. In fact, I have recently had a hearing test, and the audiologist was completely shocked that I was still hearing frequencies that supposedly cannot be heard by someone over 30 years of age (our ability to hear higher frequencies like the sizzle of a cymbal naturally declines over our lifetime). My hearing was excellent, even after 45 years of playing in Rock Bands and a lifetime of mixing music at the higher volume levels that I just described. Here is the reason for this:

    1). When I played in Rock Bands, I always kept myself positioned at an angle to the speakers - if I felt pain in my ears from the volume, I would position myself or the speakers until the sound level was 'comfortably loud'.

    2). Mixing music at a volume high enough to hear the 'subconscious' components of the arrangements DOES NOT mean listening with the volume 'Flat Out'. Again, it is possible to set the volume loud enough to get all the nuances from the music without being 'uncomfortably' loud.

    3). Using the right equipment (headphones that can help discern these musical nuances through quality rather than 'brute force' volume).



    Determining a decibel level that is damaging vs safe depends on so many unquantifiable factors for each specific case as to make it laughable. The responsibility of determining what is 'too loud' and what is NOT clearly lies with the individual listening to the music. If the music is at a level that actually 'hurts' or is uncomfortable to listen to, then you should be smart enough to back it down a notch. Even if you are intent on listening to the maximum volume possible, that is YOUR prerogative. Each individuals lifestyle is their responsibility. Even though government has gotten as far as dictating that we wear seat belts, motorcycle helmets and bicycle helmets, there are no laws to stop people from pigging out on obviously ridiculous portions of unhealthy foods (resulting in a huge increase of obesity and Type 2 diabetes), smoking cigarettes (no need to detail the negative effects here), excessive drinking, and abuse of prescription drugs.



    Unless an individual's irresponsible behavior puts others at risk (such as with second hand smoke, driving under the influence, etc.), then the government has no right to put laws into effect governing that behavior.



    You're writing as though there haven't been scores of studies about the damaging effects of sound done over many decades. But in fact, there have been.



    If you've been listening to music at very high levels for much of your life and have experienced no hearing loss as a result, I'm very happy for you. That's NOT sarcasm.



    but, the effects of loud sound at varying frequencies and durations is pretty well known, and I would say that either you are very lucky, or that you do have a hearing loss, and that you hearing would be even better today if you had not.



    Also, you know that standard hearing tests only extend to 8 KHz?
  • Reply 24 of 103
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,144member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


    Welcome to "The Mob"! This is precisely what Obamacare Protestors that the main street media likes to portray as fanatical lunatics are fearing with more governmental control to their lives, how did you put it... "When we start regulating every minor detail of life we lose the ability to make our own decisions." Or to say it more succinctly, 'More Government Control, Less Freedom!'



    Ok, let's not turn this into a governmental protest thread, by mentioning specific people or political views.
  • Reply 25 of 103
    Oh I wish the EU would just piss off and leave me alone.



    It irritates me so much I'm actually considering moving.
  • Reply 26 of 103
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,144member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post


    Oh I wish the EU would just piss off and leave me alone.



    It ain't gonna happen. We're going to see this more and more, all around the world.



    One force for this is the insurance industry. They've been behind many of the safety standards around. Most of which, have saved many lives, and prevented many injuries.



    That's helped to keep your insurance rates down.
  • Reply 27 of 103
    Yet more meddling from the nanny state.



    Quote:

    It irritates me so much I'm actually considering moving.



    You and me both mate, you and me both.
  • Reply 28 of 103
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    It ain't gonna happen. We're going to see this more and more, all around the world.



    I dont doubt that for a second. But I feel there is a good 10 years left of comparative freedom in countries other than my own.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    That's helped to keep your insurance rates down.



    That may be one positive example, but as a rule, regulation sends prices up. Infact soon flights will be so expensive due to regulation that I shall not be able to afford to escape.
  • Reply 29 of 103
    jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Resistance is futile.
  • Reply 30 of 103
    "It makes the hard decisions so you don't have to!"



    That said, I do support the universal charging standard being pushed for mobile phones.
  • Reply 31 of 103
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post


    Last - my Sony Noise Cancelling headphones (which use a AAA battery) play audio at a much lower volume than my Apple Earbuds. So, on which headphones will the test be standardized to?



    It would have to be the headphones which come with a device.
  • Reply 32 of 103
    Thank goodness I live in Africa, at least we're still way behind in the nannification of everything.
  • Reply 33 of 103
    Quote:

    Also, you know that standard hearing tests only extend to 8 KHz?



    NO, I did not know that standard tests only went to 8 KHz.

    I took this test specifically to find out if I was still able to hear high frequencies, and the people administering this test were well aware of my intentions (I discussed my history and purpose for taking the test in detail). They gave me the impression that the test did check the higher frequencies because they specifically mentioned that they had never seen someone my age being able to hear the frequencies that I did - but they did not mention an actual number. Since this was given as a 'free' test, I am now curious if this test did indeed only check to 8 KHz. I did pass the test with flying colors, but since this was a free test, I am now afraid they may have mentioned the 'frequency' thing just to butter me up. I am now going to check into this to see exactly what this test proved.

    If I find you are correct about the specific test I took, do you know if they do a more extensive test and what kind of test I should be asking for?



    Thanks for the input, Joe
  • Reply 34 of 103
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,144member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robodude View Post


    "It makes the hard decisions so you don't have to!"



    That said, I do support the universal charging standard being pushed for mobile phones.



    What I see is people saying, that " I don't like this, so I won't support regulation."



    I do like this, "so I will support regulation."



    Nothing wrong with regulation, it depends on what's being done, and how.



    Can anyone imagine what would have happened if they didn't regulate the airwaves early last century? No usable radio or Tv (or any other on air service).



    Or if there were hundreds of incompatible phone companies?



    Think of the costs of roaming then!
  • Reply 35 of 103
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,144member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by postguru View Post


    NO, I did not know that standard tests only went to 8 KHz.

    I took this test specifically to find out if I was still able to hear high frequencies, and the people administering this test were well aware of my intentions (I discussed my history and purpose for taking the test in detail). They gave me the impression that the test did check the higher frequencies because they specifically mentioned that they had never seen someone my age being able to hear the frequencies that I did - but they did not mention an actual number. Since this was given as a 'free' test, I am now curious if this test did indeed only check to 8 KHz. I did pass the test with flying colors, but since this was a free test, I am now afraid they may have mentioned the 'frequency' thing just to butter me up. I am now going to check into this to see exactly what this test proved.

    If I find you are correct about the specific test I took, do you know if they do a more extensive test and what kind of test I should be asking for?



    Thanks for the input, Joe



    8KHz is considered to be "high frequency". Because hearing tests are designed for voice intelligibility. They don't think anything else matters.



    If they said that they were doing something special, then I would contact them and ask exactly what they were measuring. There are extended tests available.
  • Reply 36 of 103
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by EmC View Post


    This is dumb. Put a warning sticker on the headphones. If people can't make this connection on their own tough. When we start regulating every minor detail of life we lose the ability to make our own decisions.



    Exactly... if they want to protect people's hearing, they should ban French music instead.
  • Reply 37 of 103
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    I thought that there was already a limit in the EU?



    I remember having to flash the North American firmware onto my 3rd gen iPod to boost the volume (which will be the same way to get around this new rule, I assume).



    Quote:

    Exactly... if they want to protect people's hearing, they should ban French music instead.



    And lose Daft Punk, Justice and Phoenix? Booo!
  • Reply 38 of 103
    jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Would someone really be able to sue Apple for hearing damage due to setting the volume too loud of their own free will and choice?



    I suppose if a woman can sue McDonald's for spilling hot coffee on herself and win, anything's possible.
  • Reply 39 of 103
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Nothing wrong with regulation, it depends on what's being done, and how.



    There are no doubt scenarios that call for regulation. Where I get irritated is when my country dictates to me what i can or cant do with my body(that includes my ears).



    For example, I was a big fan of music festivals, but in recent years the noise levels have been regulated so much that you can stand in front of the speakers and have a chit chat.

    I rarely bother going nowadays, and get my music fix from other countries instead.
  • Reply 40 of 103
    Quote:

    Oh I wish the EU would just piss off and leave me alone.



    Now why does that sound like the first line of a poem ?



    Oh I wish the EU would just piss off and leave me alone

    They're regulating my iPod, my ears and my phone

    If you're in Stuttgart, in Milan or Cologne

    The EU have your number and know when you're at home

    So don't tweak your volume to find a pure tone

    Just bugger off out of the Euro Zone





    Sorry.
Sign In or Register to comment.