article: Sorry, I Can't Hear You: I'm an iPod User

I have just read this article just now re the iPod and hearing damage. The author makes the point that Apple is not reponsible for any hearing loss occasioned by use of the iPod on the grounds that it does have a volume control to adjust the volume and so the user is ultimately responsible for the volume they choose to listen at.

He then goes on to make an analogy with the speed at which someone drives a car and the controlling function of the accelrator and brake, as follows:

While my car can do 75 mph (120km/h) through residential areas, I can choose between applying the acceleration or the brake pedal.

The point the author missies is that the car also has a speedometer which alows the driver to know what speed the car is actually doing. However, the iPod does not monitor the sound pressure level being produced in the ear by the earphones, so the user has no reliable way of knowing just what the sound level is, beyond subjective judgements of "loud" and "soft". It is notoriously difficult if not impossible to judge sound levels accurately. There is also the fact that over time the ears/brain adapt to high sound levels and so the user might continue to raise the sound level during a listening session as the music seems to be getting "softer".

Another factor that comes into play is that different recordings have different overall source levels, and also different dynamics, and so there is no direct correlation between the position of the volume control and the actual sound pressure level, so even the volume control position cannot be used as a guide.

I think the author of this article would agree that it would be unreasonable to expect car drivers to know what speed they were doing without a speedometer, and that sound levels are much more difficult to judge and more subjective than speed. I would also imagine that were a car manufacturer to sell a car lacking a speedo (hypothetical of course since the law would not permit it), it is highly likely that drivers who had speed ralted accidents would successfully sue the manufactures of those vehicles and rightly so.

8)

I have no control over how fast I would punch you, should we ever meet. I intend to sue your parents for placing such a twat on the planet.

And I have no control over this...




Die Newbie Die!
.
.
.
.

Interesting posts. Do you use the PC's inside the institutions or do they let you out on weekends?

One thing the world will never be short of is morons.

You could'nt tell I was also joking too, butt-head? Just who is the NOOB!!!!

Haha!!!!

By your estimate McDonalds should have a fatometer on their burgers, Dunkin' Doughnuts should have a thermometer on their coffee ect.

I dunno' I've been playing Guitar over 30 years,have played in several bands. Which has required me to listen to roughly 10 times the amount of music as the average person (never learned to read music so must learn songs by ear).
Yet I can still keep the volume on my tv at 11 (it goes to 70) and hear husks of bird seed hit my kitchen floor (I have a gaggle of finches).

Why can I do this? Because I'm not a moron dependant on what others say a safe volume level should be . I can judge for myself!!!

And any ripping/burning software worth its salt has a volume leveling utility but of course since any directions of how to use this is in the "Read me file" and we all know that little "Please read all instructions before use warning" means bypass all instructions & ruin your 1st 20 disks until you figure out what the hell your doing.

You sir are a whining, litigious little scumbag one of many who would ruin the free market place for the sake of your own stupidity.

Do the world a favor & whip up a Jimi Hendrix coctail [/20 vallium 10's chased with a bottle of Jim Beam] & rid this planet of your meger existance....

Die you Johnny Cochrine worshiping,A.C.L.U. programed robotic little twat.Die horribly so we may all revel in the fact that one less litigious little prick exisits in the world

Whats next, all the brothers suing the car radio, speaker, and amp manufacturers becuase they are all deaf from cranking their subs to the point their car rattles to pieces?
I am going to invest in hearing aid companies and make millions.

Just goes to show that nobody wants to take responsibility for their own actions anymore. I shot a man but I am insane, it wasnt my fault! I am bi-polar, the other person did it.
The world is in sh!t pile thats getting deeper and deeper.

Does that mean you approve of guns being freely available to the public (perhaps even without licenses or police checks)? On the basis that it is up to the individuals who buy the guns as to what they do with them?

Very true about the state of the world.
As to "responsibility for their own actions", does not this also apply to businesses as welll as individuals? Should'nt Apple also take responsiblity for THEIR actions as well? Their are two parties involved here, not one - the iPod user AND the iPod manaufacturer. Both should be accountable. This is what the court will decide - who is responsible. It might be both!

As the party that created the technology, they should know about the difficulty of judging high sound levels, and as responsible human being's who should care about the other human beings (especially those using their products) should they not be concerned that they are not even inadvertantly placing their users in a potentially dangerous situation?

You also ignore the issue of the effect of high sound levels on others around iPod users. I am currently doing a course at Uni, and I find it very hard to concentrate in class doing an assignment when their are twenty or thirty iPods tinging and doofing away in the background. What we do affects others.

As to the suppliers of car hi-fi, I'd just love to see them all put out of business. It is dangerous to other road users for people to be driving cars with those incredible sound levels pumoing away in their eardrums - it is hardly likely to improve the drivers concentration.

It is hard to imagine how any sane intelligent person would derive pleasure from smashing their eardrums to pieces listening to the "doof doof" beat of a drum machine. These types of people are the ones we should worry about, not those litigating.

Yes it is a shit pile and getting shittier by the minute. But thats the inevitable result of people deciding things for themselves how to act and doing whatever they feel is right without regard for the effect their actions have on others around them. Precisely the kind of attitude you seem to be recommending.

Whearas the foundation underlying the concept of litigation is that what we do affects others, and that we should be accountable for our actions and made to account for them. This more positive and socially responsible attitude seems to be the one you are against.

You seem therefor to be in the awkward situation of someone who is concerned about the deteriorating condition in the world around them, yet at the same time a supporter of the attitude that is the root cause of this problem.

8)

I simply am stating that it is not rational to make people responsible to excercise judgement over things which they cannot easily measure. It is much easier for McDonalds to supply imformation concerning the fat content of their burgers than to expect each individual consumer to somehow "guestimate" just how much fat is in them or send them to a lab. As regards the temperature of a hot coffee, that is a somewhat different situation, since the human body is quite good at determining when something is too hot. I can put a cup containing hot liquid to my mouth, gently touch it with my tongue or lips, and quickly will know if it is scaldingly hot before drinking some and burning the inside of my mouth. I cannot however "sense" the amount of fat in a burger. McDonalds is in a position to measure it, so why shouldnt they?

I dunno' I've been playing Guitar over 30 years,have played in several bands. Which has required me to listen to roughly 10 times the amount of music as the average person (never learned to read music so must learn songs by ear).
Yet I can still keep the volume on my tv at 11 (it goes to 70) and hear husks of bird seed hit my kitchen floor (I have a gaggle of finches).

Why can I do this? Because I'm not a moron dependant on what others say a safe volume level should be . I can judge for myself!!!

In my experience young iPod users seem to have the phones surgically implanted - they only take them out to sleep and shower (perhaps not even then!). Students in my class often are lsitening even while the teacher is lecturing. They certainly listen while they are working on assignments. I would estimate they listen to more music in a day than I would in one or two months - easy. And most of this listening is done at high levels, certainly it seems so when you take into account that you can hear the phones working across the room from the iPod user.

You might listen to lots of music "by ear" for your band, but is that done at very high levels using headphones? Does your band rehearse at ear-splitting levels? No doubt you gig at high volumes, especially in large venues.

And any ripping/burning software worth its salt has a volume leveling utility but of course since any directions of how to use this is in the "Read me file" and we all know that little "Please read all instructions before use warning" means bypass all instructions & ruin your 1st 20 disks until you figure out what the hell your doing.

Why would most people bother to adjust the recorded level when they have a playback volume control? Only those who are aware of the issue of damage from high sound levels would worry about this, and of course most people are not. I bet I could tell you about 10 or 20 potentially dangerous situations you may encounter in life that you are not as yet aware of. There are so many hazards in life (from food additives, cheimcals in cleaning agents, materials in buildings like asbestos and glass fibre) it is simply not reasonable to expect every individual to assume responsibility to research and identify and then avoid every possible hazrd they might encounter.

As a long time musician, it is hardly surprising that you have some knowledge of the dangers of high sound levels, but as a musician myself (I have player huitar for over 30 years too) I know full well that many musicians have only a vague awareness even so.

You sir are a whining, litigious little scumbag one of many who would ruin the free market place for the sake of your own stupidity.

Do the world a favor & whip up a Jimi Hendrix coctail [/20 vallium 10's chased with a bottle of Jim Beam] & rid this planet of your meger existance....

Die you Johnny Cochrine worshiping,A.C.L.U. programed robotic little twat.Die horribly so we may all revel in the fact that one less litigious little prick exisits in the world [/quote]

[b] It is a shame you had to ruin what was until then a reasonable attempt at outting a rational argument and resort to childish and immature name calling, especially considering your age (obviously over 30).

It seems a shame that for someone advocating that people should behave in a responsible and intelligent fashion when it comes to delaing with issues such as high sound levels and eating good food, should be so unable to behave in such a fashion when it comes to discourse on web forum.

Perhaps the forum should implement a "swearometer" or "abuseometer" to stop people like you behaving so badly.

The whole things non-sense. Kids that do really stupid things don't grow
up to have kids of their own...






...I love nature.

As a long time musician, it is hardly surprising that you have some knowledge of the dangers of high sound levels,

Replace long time musician with "Reasonably intelligent person"

And I honestly [/no sarcasam here] have absoutly no pity what so ever for anyone with Obeseity problems who blame the market place, hearing problems from any audio source That they have a volume control for, coffee scaldings, accidental poisenings or overdoses from failure to read lables {putting bleach where baby can get it,Anti freeze where doggie can get it} or any other source of failure on the part of the end user to live up to his/ her responsibility To Read The Fookin warnings!!!

Its just that simple!!!

Bottom line:- if people insist on having their ipod headphones jacked-up to the max then its their dumbfock selves who are to blame for any form of hearing loss/damage.

Quite frankly, I am sick to death of frivolous law suits being brought before the courts of the developed world. The United States - and to a lesser degree my own country - sees some ludicrous trial cases that are not only non-sensical, but are, to a certain extent, unacceptable to any people of utilitarian or common sense beliefs.

Its the technicality utilised in arguing these cases that make lawyers rich; their dumb-arsed ignoramus clients rich; and leaves the rest of the community who rely on common sense to live their lives scratching their heads in disbelief saying things not dissimilar to: "Jeez, did you hear about Bob? Guy spills a coffee over his face and sues Joe's Diner for negligence and now he's 10k richer courtesy of some fancy lawyer he hired from up Denver way. What's the world coming to?". We leave it at that but the truth is that we're, in some cases, rewarding ignorance and buffoon-like folk for their absolute stupidity.

I got off track a touch.

I am afraid the world is actually a hellishly complicated place and getting more so by the minute. If only it were simple - but it isnt.

When you say "its just that simple" what you really mean is "I am going to treat it as if it is that simple" whether it is or not.

I am sorry to say that the world is not going to change to accomodate your fanatasy.

Suppose you were the twit going deaf. Does that make a difference? I think it might.

I tend to feel sorry for people who are diadvantaged. If I see someone who has lost their legs in a car accident, I feel sorry for them and am happy to see them supplied with w wheelchair to help them cope.

In a similar way I am sorry for people who lack common sense, but rather than see them punished for it, I would like to help them, both by education and also by designing things that protect them from their own disability - e.g. lack of sense.

If you had a yound child who borrowed an iPod from a mate at school, and you found him in hsi bedroom listening with the sound level jacked up to the max, would you just leave him and say "oh well, if he/she is that stupid let them lose tehir hearing" and do nothing or would you tap him/her on the shoulder and say "are you aware of the danger of high sound levels"?

Even better analogy - if you got your son/daughter a music player and you had the choice between one which limited sound levels to no dangerous levels and one which didnt (all other things being equal) which one would you buy? (for your own son/daughter)

If everyone were born with a perfectly functioning brain with no physical defects, and everyone had the early guidance of competant, intelligent and loving parents, then the opportunity of a high quality education, etc, then I might well have your attitude to some degree. But people are;nt all sensible and well educated, and often not of any fault of their own.

I am all for protecting people and keeping them safe. Why the hell not, if you can?

OK, it's clear now. You're a f**king retard. You can't keep everyone safe.
Safety has gone to insane lengths. A helmet to ride a bike? More lives would
be saved if people wore helmets when driving cars! (true) Do you advocate that?

My 4 year old was climbing our stairs on the wrong side of the railing. I didn't
stop her. Why, because I knew she wouldn't get that hurt, but more importantly,
I knew when she fell (she did), she'd learn a lesson. (she did)

Safer products don't make anybody safer. You can miss-use anything. It's
pussies like you that make life boring for everyone else!!!

OK, it's clear now. You're a f**king retard. You can't keep everyone safe.
Safety has gone to insane lengths. A helmet to ride a bike? More lives would
be saved if people wore helmets when driving cars! (true) Do you advocate that?

My 4 year old was climbing our stairs on the wrong side of the railing. I didn't
stop her. Why, because I knew she wouldn't get that hurt, but more importantly,
I knew when she fell (she did), she'd learn a lesson. (she did)

Fine. She may have bruised her leg, but then the bruise would heal. In the meantime the pain and shock would have rammed home the lesson about climbing.

But while you are losing your hearing gradually bit by bit over time, you feel no pain nor do you notice - until its too late. And when your hearing is damaged in this way, it does not heal up. You may eventually learn a lesson about high sound levels, but by then its too late to undo the damage.

Would you stand by and let your daughter start smoking without warning her, on the basis that when she gets terminal lung cancer she will learn an important lesson?

Sorry but there is a big difference between the bannister scenario and the iPod one - they are not directly comparable.

Safer products don't make anybody safer. You can miss-use anything. It's
pussies like you that make life boring for everyone else!!!

[b]So are you saying that having an iPod that cannot damage your hearing is boring? Does it takes away that invigorating sense of danger that at any time you might lose your hearing!!!

You are quite correct that you can misuse anything, and that nothing can be made completely "abuse-proof", so I agree with you on that. But the iPod issue re high sound levels is not a case of extreme abuse by rampaging morons, but an insidious and sublte danger that even sensible and intelligent people often fall victim to. The two are very different.

I guess it possible for someone to switch on an electric toaster, then ram their fingers inside the slot and toast their hand. I am not advocating that we should design a toaster to allow for such idiotic behaviour. On the other hand I do want to buy toaster that has exposed electric cable on the side that could electrocute me during normal use if I am not very careful where I put my hands.

Its all about a happy medium. I think you are wrong in (seeming to) assert that only iPod users who are complete morons will damage their ears inadvertantly. The real situation is that many reasonably sensible people who are simply ignorant of the physics of and biology of the human ear (which I guess is most people) will use what are actually damagingly high sound levels over long periods of time believing they are actually using safe levels and completely unaware of what is happening. These people are simple ordinary people falling victim to a sublte and insidious issue, not necessarily something out of dumb and dumber.

I am not advocating making everything moron proof, but simply making things ordinary unsuspecting non-technical people proof.

Do a poll. Ask everyone you meet Thursday if loud sounds can damage their hearing.
When they all say yes, smack yourself. Or as Tomsmart said, get a man to do it.

Unfortuneatly that is not true enough. There are plenty of stupid, ignorant, people that have kids. Politicians being the biggest ones.

You voted for Bush?

I have less patience with this kind of stuff living in good ol' Lawyers Inc...er...
I mean America.

I agree on helping people, but that has it's limit's. When Chrissy Reeve broke
is neck on a horse? Funny! What must be done before a horse can be riden for the
first time? You have to break him. Why? He doesn't want to be riden. So if you
go and ride him anyways and get hurt...too damn funny...

I don't know anyone who doesn't know loud sound levels will damage hearing.
But, no one cares. "It won't happen to me." You can't police that.

Conclusions and Recommendations

* Sounds of sufficient intensity and duration will damage the ear and result in temporary or permanent hearing loss at any age.
* NIHL is characterized by specific anatomic and physiologic changes in the inner ear.
* Sounds with levels less than 75 dB(A), even after long exposures, are unlikely to cause permanent hearing loss.
* Sounds with levels above 85 dB(A) with exposures of 8 hours per day will produce permanent hearing loss after many years.
* There is a broad range of individual differences among people in the amount of hearing loss each suffers as a result of identical exposures.
* Current scientific knowledge is inadequate to predict that any particular individual will be safe when exposed to a hazardous noise.
* Because sources of potentially hazardous sound are present in both occupational and nonoccupational settings, personal hearing protection should be used when hazardous exposures are unavoidable.
* Vigorous enforcement of existing regulations, particularly for the workplace and consumer product labeling, would significantly reduce the risk of workplace NIHL. Regulations should be broadened to encompass all employees with hazardous noise exposures.
* Application of existing technologies for source noise control, especially in the manufacture of new equipment and construction of new facilities, would significantly reduce sound levels at the ear.
* In addition to existing hearing conservation programs, a comprehensive program of education regarding the causes and prevention of NIHL should be developed and disseminated, with specific attention directed toward educating school-age children.


Took me 45 sec to find online...

I'm sorry, or not, but I cant resist:

I would say to the Ipod User:

Are your ear drums hurting, sweetheart? You feel a throbbing headache coming on, honey? See that blood pissing out of your focking ears, Sugarplum? Well, you've got the focking IPOD UP TOO FOCKING LOUD!!!