Anyone gone back to a passive headset after using noise cancelling?

[ejensen]

P.S. And I think something is very wrong with them if a passive DC is quieter than the Lightspeeds.

I keep my old DCs at the hangar for those days when I just get a desire to go flying and the flight bag is at home. They’re never quieter than any of the ANRs I’ve ever worn.

Agree, I like my ZULU3s and passenger gets my older Lightspeed. Mic boom broke and they fixed for free.

 

[Lndwarrior]

For the sake of others, not to convince you.

ANR is *far* more effective than passive. It is simply objectively true that it blocks more sound. Now, whether it's worth the dramatically higher cost is a legit question since ANR and passive both bring sound levels down to safe ones. But in terms of the amount of sound reaching the ear drum, ANR is the hands down winner.

I've done a bunch of research on this since my original post. I've come to the same conclusion that you have.

 

[airdale]

For the sake of others, not to convince you.

ANR is *far* more effective than passive. It is simply objectively true that it blocks more sound. Now, whether it's worth the dramatically higher cost is a legit question since ANR and passive both bring sound levels down to safe ones. But in terms of the amount of sound reaching the ear drum, ANR issue the hands down winner.

Some data, please. Including attenuation plots and including representative sampling of multiple models. Your claims are IMO completely over the top.

 

[BrianNC]

I've gone from ANR to in-ear Halos from Quiet Technologies. As a matter of fact I flew to St Simon's Island a couple of weeks ago, wore the Halos down and a pair of Bose A20s on the way back and seriously couldn't tell the difference. But I would never wear an over the ear passive headset.

 

[flyingron]

For the sake of others, not to convince you.

ANR is *far* more effective than passive. It is simply objectively true that it blocks more sound. Now, whether it's worth the dramatically higher cost is a legit question since ANR and passive both bring sound levels down to safe ones. But in terms of the amount of sound reaching the ear drum, ANR is the hands down winner.

That's only if you're comparing over-the-ear head phones. The "in ear" passives have equivalent specs to the ANR.

Furhter, the place where ANR excels over even the passive (old David Clamps, etc....) over the ear is in LOW FREQUENCY noise which is not really the stuff you're worried about in hearing protection. The passive over the years do a pretty good (26db or so) suppression of the higher frequency stuff.

 

[172andyou]

That's only if you're comparing over-the-ear head phones. The "in ear" passives have equivalent specs to the ANR.

That's a fair point. I, subjectively, don't like those at all so they aren't really on my radar. I've tried three different kinds, could never get a fit comfortable enough to seriously consider.

Here's more on the science and practical aspects of over the ear...

http://www.lightspeedaviation.com/c...-What-factors-make-a-headset-the-quietest.htm

 

[flyingron]

Well, first off, I take an article that is written by purveyors of ANR headsets as bible.
Second, their methodology is bogus. There's a difference between an ANR heaset with the ANR turned off and designed to be passive headset.

 

[airdale]

... I've tried three different kinds ...

So the sweeping pronouncements in your post #40 were based on this level of research ?

 

[172andyou]

Well, first off, I take an article that is written by purveyors of ANR headsets as bible.
Second, their methodology is bogus. There's a difference between an ANR heaset with the ANR turned off and designed to be passive headset.

So give me a better source. I agree that industry sources should be looked at with suspicion, but equally I'm a scientist and found that write up to be pretty decent with no major gaps. While it did test ANR headsets, it talked more broadly about tradeoffs, but I'm willing to look at other stuff if you have something.

So the sweeping pronouncements in your post #40 were based on this level of research ?

No. What were yours based on?

 

[flyingron]

So give me a better source. I agree that industry sources should be looked at with suspicion, but equally I'm a scientist and found that write up to be pretty decent with no major gaps. While it did test ANR headsets, it talked more broadly about tradeoffs, but I'm willing to look at other stuff if you have something.

For what. All they are saying is their and other headphones the ANR on are quieter than with the ANR off. Duh. It doesn't compare passive-only headphones (over the ear or in the year) at all. Given the 2K-4K range of hearing damage (Yes, there are some research at lower frequency, but that's not well developed), the curves for the ANR on and ANR off lines are pretty much coincident.

What ANR does when you turn it on is sharply decrease the lower frequency stuff which is a lot of the prop noise. You can do this with a passive but it takes a good seal (either an occlusive ear plug like the in-the-ear headphones provide or a pretty high amount of clamping pressure by the over the ear passives). That's not to say that an ANR isn't going to be more comfortable (less clamping pressure, less fatigue from the LF noise), but it's not the case that it's doing anything special to prevent hearing loss and it's not doing anything that you can't do with the in the ear (if you can tolerate them).

Of course, after all that I'll tell you I do fly with Lightspeed Zulu.2's. While my wife's ClarityAloft have equal (and in some cases better performance) I was never fond of them and I can't wear them now (unless I pull my hearing aids out).

 

[172andyou]

"For what."

For data on the efficacy on ANR/Passive/in-ear.

 

[flyingron]

"For what."

For data on the efficacy on ANR/Passive/in-ear.

The data in that article doesn't support that claim even if you believe it.

 

[JonH]

Idk, since I got the Bose A20 I miss hearing the engine and often just use the passive mode. I don't fly more than a few hours a month though.

 

[airdale]

... No. What were yours based on?

I did not make any sweeping pronouncements. I reported on my experience, basically the same as @flyingron's. I actually was trained as an engineer and scientist and know that making sweeping pronouncements like yours in post #40 is somewhere between dangerous and ludicrous. That's why I asked to see the supporting data. I am still waiting.

 

[DanWilkins]

Never left!

 

[pigpenracing]

A while ago Lightspeed told me that the repair would be $200.

I just can't see spending $200 To repair a nine year old headset.

The responses here have got me thinking about a new anr headset. Probably not Zulus though, because of this problem.

I can sell you a like new/used headset if you need something. I have Lightspeeds and David Clarks now

 

[chemgeek]

I have a first generation Lightspeed Zulu and there is no way I would go back to my H10-13.4 headsets, although I liked them a lot. There is no comparison. The Lightspeeds are still working great, and I have replaced the ear seals once in 10 years. Batteries are no big deal. A change every 25 hours or so. I keep a spare set of AAs in my flight bag.

 

[3393RP]

I pushed the envelope a little too far.

That's never gonna get old. The part about trannys cracks me up every time.

 

[airdale]

Another factor wrt the upper frequencies where in-the-ear passive shines is that those upper frequencies are in the range of human speech. I have never worn a headset that makes ATC easier to understand than my Clarity Aloft sets. Really, it is not a small difference. I guess that's why they named the company "Clarity."