[Joe Bloggs]

Now, let it be known at the start that I'm no DJ...

But I have long been wondering whether phones with accurate (ie. properly proportioned) highs are good or bad for DJs. They have to turn their phones so loud, that it seems to be a good idea to have phones to have attenuated highs, to avoid hearing loss in the high frequency region, which is the most vulnerable part of human hearing...

Just wondering

 

[a1leyez0nm3]

if you are a good dj, you wont turn your headphones "so loud", you will use a headphone that blocks out noise (ie hd280). you want highs, if you dont turn your music up loud.

 

[Tim D]

There is no correlation that high frequencies cause high frequency hearing loss. High SPL over time causes hearing loss. I think it is that high frequency hearing loss is just the most common *resultant* and not necessarily a *causal* relation.

Hearing damage is caused when you bend your hair cells too far, wheter it is from extremely loud high pitched soundwaves or the rumbling of bass sounds. In fact it is the large pressure waves of bass sounds that usually carry more energy. Just because people find high pitch noises as more annoying does not mean it causes hearing damage. In fact a "bright" headphone might be less conductive to hearing loss since brightness makes people turn things down. Whereas you can just as easily be tricked into thinking your lusciously warm and glorious headphones are not doing you hearing damage just because it sounds so musical and non-fatiguing.

Do you ever see cars with super tweeters blasting away? No it is usually cars with an overdose of subwoofers. Why? Because the sound does not happen to cause an inherent wretch response from everyone that super tweeters at the same SPL levels would. Wheter or not you have a trained wretch response from subwoofer overdose is a different matter. I think we are just born to consider high pitched noises as annoying, wheter it is the shriek of a woman, or nails on the chalkboard, or a crying baby. Than again Japanese consider high pitched female voices as a polite thing so it could be all trained responses.

http://www.neurophys.wisc.edu/www/aud/johc.html

Hair cells to me seem like microphone transducers...which in turn do the opposite function of any playback transducers, but in the same way (your headphones can be plugged into a microphone jack and you can actually record sounds from your headphone).

What causes greater diagphram excursion...reproducing or detecting bass sounds, or reproducing or detecting high pitch sounds. To me, it would seem that bass sounds causes greater diapghram excursion...it probably causes greater hair cell bending...and if you damage the hair cells by too much bending...I'd figure their ability to detect smaller but faster soundwaves would be damaged first.

 

[phidauex]

I'm not a pro DJ, but I've done some DJing, and spun at a few house parties and whatnot, and I can tell you that I prefer accurate highs in my phones. The bass beat is the most 'typical' sound to listen to while beatmatching, but some people, myself included, often pay the most attention to snare and hi-hat lines, especially in breakbeat songs where the kick drum may be erratic and difficult to follow. In that case, accurate highs are a must.

A well isolating phone does not need to be turned up super loud to be effective, also, in a well designed sound system, with highly directional performance speakers, sound levels are much lower behind the speakers than you might expect. In a good situation, you can talk to people at only a slighly above average volume while behind the speakers. DJs often have a second pair of monitor speakers that they use as well, but they have control over them, and can turn them up or down at will.

And about the headphones as a mic thing, I had a DJ friend who would occasionaly plug his 7506s into the mic input on his board, and shout strange gibberish into the earcups. It worked, it didn't sound good, but that wasn't the point really.

peace,
phidauex

 

[punosion]

Well, generally while beatmatching (straight 4/4 beats), I listen to the beats "fighting"eachother. When you get the beats close enough, the two waves of the bass hits will start to ride on top of eachother and phase eachother out, which creates strange, dull thuds. This is a really good indication that you have quite a tight beatmatch.

When I establish this, I start to go for the highs, making sure the cymbals and transients in both songs are hitting precisely in line with eachother.

With breakbeat, you really have to go for the highs and mids...listening to the bass is good, but there is a lot more room for the bass to be slightly "off" and still sound quite "on" the beat...but if you listen to the high stuff, you might start to notice some "swing," even though the bass beats in both songs sound quite tight.

So, its sorta both ways for me. I do agree, however, that it would be far more advantageous to get a pair of cans that offers a balanced range and a lot of isolation, than a pair of cans that offers a strong bass or strong treble response, but not much isolation.

Enjoy your sound, but BE SAFE!

 

[a1leyez0nm3]

if you connect one speaker with the polarities wrong and the other right, you will get the speakers fighting eachother... dull thuds... but thats off topic.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Tim,

Ears don't work quite the way microphones and a recording system does...

For one thing, it doesn't take the readings directly off the eardrum, sample the eardrum position at a certain rate of kHz, then do FFT to determine the different frequency components

Instead, different hair cells are tuned by the structure of the cochlea to be excited by different frequencies. Basically, when a low frequency sound hits the eardrum, only a small part of the eardrum (the part furthest from the eardrum, btw) resonates with the vibrations, and only the hair cells in this region of the cochlea respond. These can be considered to be the 'bass' hair cells.

When a high frequency sound hits the eardrum, again, only a small part of the eardrum (the part closer to the eardrum) resonates with the vibrations, and only the hair cells here respond--these are the 'treble' hair cells.

If the 'treble' hair cells are triggered, you hear treble. If you don't hear treble, your treble hair cells are not being triggered.

Thus, you can listen to car hifis with the subwoofer turned up crazy all day and your ability to listen to treble would hardly be touched. Unless your eardrums are ruptured by the sheer SPL, that is. And because the 'bass' hair cells are more sturdy than the treble hair cells, dum-basses are at less risk of hearing damage than we are.

This is why I asked whether it is safer for DJs to use phones with crappy hf response, since they seem to turn them up so darn high.

 

[CaptBubba]

Isn't the hair that detects hi-freq sounds at the front of the cochlea? I'm pretty sure taht stong bass damages them more than hi-freq sounds, because the bass bends the hairs untill they are damaged IIRC.

 

[ai0tron]

Capn bubba is right

The reason why most people lose their hearing in the high frequencies first is because the cells which sense higher frequencies are further out closer to the opening of your ear. So when big bass hits come tumbling into your ear canal like an earthquake they bear the brunt of the energy dissipation and thus are damaged more quickly then the other cells located further in.

 

[Gluegun]

Um, don't some types of beatmatching (for some genres) require lots of information about the highs to be present? Not *ALL* forms of electronic dance music use the bass beat to match two tracks... some use stuff in the highs...

 

[Tim D]

Quote:

For one thing, it doesn't take the readings directly off the eardrum, sample the eardrum position at a certain rate of kHz, then do FFT to determine the different frequency components

I never said it did.

However our ears and the hair cells do convert mechanical energy into electrical energy. And in fact this electrical energy containing coded information of frequency, intensity, and duration, and is analyzed by the brain.

Yes hair cells are tuned to different frequencies and grouped accordingly in the Cochlea. That does not mean they are immutable to all frequencies except the ones they are tuned for.

Just like the tongue and its specialzied grouping of taste buds. Eating the hottest chili pepper in the world will not ONLY harm the taste buds that are most sensitive to it...you can rub it all over the taste buds that primarily just detect sweetness, and then you can tell me how your tongue feels when you do that.

Some areas of your skin are more sensitive to temperature, or pressure. Are the areas of your skin that are less sensitive to temperature or pressure also more robust against damage from extreme temperature or pressure? Detection and sensitivity in itself does not indicate particular weakness against its stimulis...it is in fact our early warning system against damage. But damage is damage wheter or not it is well detected or not. And the heavy bass hit carrying a lot of energy is a heavy bass hit carrying a lot of energy, wheter or not some cells are more sensitive in detecting it or not. And painkillers don't prevent or repair damage (like in the game Max Payne), they stop you from feeling it.

The hair cells are subject to mechanical energy, when people listen to bass, the hair cells that detect bass will fire off like crazy, and these cells will jump and dance more than the others...yet they is no indication that intense bass destroys bass perception. In fact the typical deaf dum-bass can still enjoy their bass with disregard to qualities of high frequencies. You can probably listen to the nails of a chalkboard all day and not suffer hearing damage (only psychological damage). And you can also ride a bike and not mind the wind noise or consider it overbearing and annoying....but it is the wind noise that probably holds the most energy and destructiveness.

There has been no studies or research data showing correlation that hearing damage is caused by the frequency of sound, only studies by the amplitude and energy of sound. High frequencies go first because they are most susceptable period perhaps due to location (or perhaps require the most precision in detecting higher frequencies). They might not fire off to the sounds of bass...but who is to say they don't bend to the energy of bass waves regardless of firing off or not.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Um, but the thing is, when they are bent, they fire, and when they fire, you perceive high frequency sounds.

AFAIK the mechanical tuning is much more precise than the examples given about skin and touch. It's almost like how a few small explosive charges would normally have next to no effect on a bridge but you can bring it crashing down if and only if set them off at the right places at the right times.