1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

ADEL Technology - Discussion Thread - Update: March 27, 2016: Please Read 2nd Post of the Thread

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by eaglewings, Mar 7, 2016.
1 2 3 4 5
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
  1. Ruben123
    Thats what were doing now arent we. Sort of. If there are properly done tests, Id really like to read them. Participating in a sort of interview (is that what it is?) and asking about the science involved, is not what Im interested in. I might get another explanation by the founder of ADEL who might as well be trying to sell some "snake oil". Or he might not. Of course a DBT regarding hearing damage cant be done, but using some sort of phantom puppet (correct english?) which could be used to do measurements would be nice. Theories alone dont mean much (and certainly not about the sounds traveling across your cavities in your head being picked up by the other ear's cochlea, that is nonsense until Ive read evidence that says else). Certainly there might be some good aspects and I really appreciate some people caring about hearing loss (or use them as marketing, who knows), but some claims made dont make any sense. Let the founders/scientists of ADEL join the discussion here :)
  2. Ruben123

    Thanks for the offer, but as I said: Id like to see the studies on (digital) paper. Must not be that hard to share them is it?
  3. Brooko Contributor
    So please PM Steve (Canyon Runner) your specific questions for the Spreecast. It would also be good for you to actually include cited references to back up your own beliefs (you seem extremely vocal and strong in these beliefs so it should be relatively easy for you to cite these).
    You should then be able to get your concerns addressed and answered.
  4. Ruben123
    As I said, Id rather see a discussion here than in a video. Video is only question-reponse, without the possibility to ask back.
    I suggest we all can make a list of questions instead of PMing all the same questions, here:
    - Id like to see research papers about evidence, or strong conclusions about the technique, causing less hearing damage.
    - If possible a DBT with the difference being how much dB less people with ADEL use
    - Why ADEL's sounds do travel from the one ear to the cochlea of the other (deaf people could hear claim), and why as it seems normal earphones do not do this
    - What they think causes tinnitus and fatigue, and why. With evidence/ sources (no claims) or researches
    - Why "pneumatic" pressure is worse than just "normal" sound pressure (what is it even?)
    - If I get it right, you say that you want to inhibit the m stapediusreflex (acoustic reflex). It is only activated by louder lower frequency tones, so why is making a more neutral earphone not good enough? Any neutral, non bright earphone would be sufficient. Problem is: higher frequencies cause hearing loss much sooner because they have much more energy.
    - Are you saying you can prevent hearing loss? And fatigue? What is fatigue then?
    - When playing a sound at X db (for instance 90dB) and the acoustic reflex is activated and dampens the volume 15dB (it does that), the sound in the inner ear will be 90-15db. What the ADEL seems to do, is playing the music at the same 75dB that the inner ear reaches. Difference being the eardrum that moves else.
    - I get the pneumatic pressure, but is it significant and is there any evidence for? Does it even add something, to remove the *pressure* while still having the same volume?
    - In the article, a lot of claims are made without sources or evidence. Also the stapediusreflex damping the sound pressure level by 50dB is very incorrect: it is 15dB.
    - It is possible pneumatic pressure exists, being influenced the most by bass notes (Ive experienced it in cheap Sennhsier CX300 clones), if relieving the ear from the extra pressure prevents this (evidence please), which the ADEL must do, why not making a more neutral earphone to not even have that bass blurb sound?
    - Is fatigue only an IEM thing? Why do you think that? Ive had some fatigue (pretty severe) from an earbud (VE Monk, bit bassy) from a not bass orientated song by Bob Dylan: it was the eardrum piercing harmonica that did it for me (I think). And that was a non seaeled earbud. Also Ive experienced some pretty bad fatigue after some songs on a not so loud volume with bright speakers.
    - Is it a problem that the eardrum shakes a lot if the acoustic reflex is triggered? What then?
    (just quote this post and I will add your question so only 1 list of questions exists in the end, either PMed or answered here) (will add my own questions too)
    muza_1 and Brooko like this.
  5. Canyon Runner
    Nobody has said that volume of sound doesn't hurt your ear. We've talked about this before, long exposure to loud volumes like at a concert or loud engines of course will damage your ears.

    You're missing the huge change when you seal something to your ear canal and create a trapped volume. Proportionally to the volume in your ear canal, that pneumatic pressure in a sealed chamber is massive. In order to recreate that with loud speakers, you'd need to blow out a wall in your house and replace it with stacks upon stacks of speakers (or Marshall amps for flavor). Now put microphones on the opposing wall from the new speaker wall.

    As the wall of speaker starts to play music, the speakers are obviously going in and out, changing the volume of the whole room. Like squeezing a waterbottle. Don't you think that would have an effect on the music? That pressure would be holding the speakers still as the excursion compresses pressure in the room, like having a finger over the tip of a syringe, the air trapped in the end holds the plunger still. This is a traditional IEM that is sealed to your ear canal. That finger on the syringe is your ear drum, when that pressure is compressing on top of it, do you really think it's able to translate the sound vibrations in an ideal situation? If you put your hand on a drum head and hit the drum, is it the same response as you hold the head still or does it change when it's moving freely?

    Now if you were to do that, what if you put a chimney on that room? 

    Suddenly that pressure would be trying to escape out the chimney. If you make it a big enough escape port, that opposing wall is no longer being bashed with pressure (obviously still some pressure, but nothing like when it is being compressed in a trapped volume) because it's escaping elsewhere, but the wall is still getting just as much sound shot directly at the microphones.

    This is what ADEL does, it lets the pressure escape from your ear canal, rather than holding your ear drum still. By doing this, your eardrum is able to listen the way it was designed to, rather than having to turn it up to still try and overpower your ear drum being held still.

    Yes loud volume will always hurt an ear, nobody has said ADEL equipped IEMs are the magical cure or that it's impossible to hurt your ears now. Or that you can turn up the volume as much as you want and you won't have your ears ringing afterwards, that's insane.

    It's simply addressing something that has been long overlooked by the industry. 
  6. Ruben123
    What he's trying to tell, is that pressure may be of importance but there is still volume/loudness left. We'd like to read some papers about how and if it works in real life. Adel is selling an earphone which should lessen hearing damage but does it and to what extend.
  7. ken6217

    I'm just saying that when you see people posting that they are buying these to save their hearing, I believe that is erroneous. 
    Maybe put on the packaging" ADEL module relieves pneumatic pressure which can help prevent........., however listening to loud music can still damage your hearing. Then everybody will be happy.
    By the way, did you know you were going to work overtime without pay for this job? :)
  8. Canyon Runner
    @ken6217: I'm not in control of the packaging. It's not wrong to say that it's less harmful to your ear, since it is infact helping a big part of the problem, but it's certainly not like "bolt-on invincible ears", ya know? Sorta like traction control in a car, you can still wreck but it's certainly going to cut down on alot of the situations of wrecking. So would you say that's safer? I would, perhaps you wouldn't. That's totally fine. 

    As for posting, the only big adjustment is not always getting to say directly what I want to, because it doesn't look good for the company. Be it a joke or busting somebody's chops a bit. Regardless of if it's on the clock or not, interacting with the audiophile community via head-fi is really important. This way we know if there's something begging to be addressed that we weren't able to see ourselves. Plus, through customer interaction, we're able to incorporate what you guys want into future products, rather than just going off what a few people think is needed. More input (when appropriate) means better overall product. So I don't mind it really, it's a win for everybody.

    I'm trying to get you the papers that you're requesting and be able to post them. I totally understand you (or any others) would want to read them, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I'm not ignoring you, nor your request, I just don't have them and I have to get them from the guys above me. We aren't all local, so it's not always the easiest task. Plus some of them are SUPER long and they don't always feel comfortable posting everything, not to mention head-fi is sorta tricky to post certain formats to. It's real easy to bring up (papers, videos, diagrams, etc) during video calls and go over it, that's why that option is always offered. It's also preferred in the way that a simple phone call can be much easier than alot of texts back and forth. I have the time to post, Stephen doesn't. So when things are directly for him, he wants to respond directly back to the person in the best way possible.
    Ruben123 likes this.
  9. ken6217
    It was more tongue in cheek.
  10. krismusic Contributor
    What evidence is there that other IEM's damage hearing. The only cases of this that I have seen sited are in combination with other factors such as loud live concerts and night clubs. As well as listening to IEM's at excessive volume. Are the inventors of ADEL really saying that all other IEM and CIEM manufacturers products are dangerous to their customers hearing?
  11. Ruben123

    They are, because any sound 80/90dB> can damage hearing, being it at a concert, with earbuds or in-ears. But I guess that was not the reply you were looking for :) We want evidence that the hearing loss will be less than with regular IEMs.
  12. ken6217

    I've been a naysayer, but they may be able to prove the pneumatic pressure can contribute to hearing loss. However you are still left with the volume being played in your ear which can cause hearing loss over time. So now you (maybe) eliminate one of the two potential issues.
    So basically getting shot and stabbed is really bad, however being shot or stabbed is still bad.
  13. Canyon Runner
    Here's one of the pieces from the National Science Foundation

    Brooko and lukeap69 like this.
  14. krismusic Contributor
    So you are accepting that there is a real and present danger to hearing from most IEM's and CIEMS?
    That would seem the bigger news to me.
    The "fact" not your acceptance! :wink:
    Especially to those of us who have invested substantially in TOTL products.
    Should we now stop using them if we value our hearing, as anyone on here surely does?!
  15. Ruben123

    Not sure if I get what you mean lol
    Of course any sound +-85dB and greater can cause damage, being a cheap or expensive earbud, iem, speaker...
1 2 3 4 5
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Share This Page