Thread: Sony noise cancelling Headphones - suitable for low level ear defending?

I have a set of Bose nise-cancelling headphones which are very nice and comfortable. The noise cancelling is pretty effective, even in a workshop. However, I don't believe that cancelling this level of noise was ever the intended design purpose of consumer level headphones. Cancelling the drone of a jet engine while sitting in a plane, yes. Cancelling the drone of my colleagues at work so I can get something done, yes. Cancelling the scream of a router, right in front of my face, combined with a wailing dust extractor is another matter and likely to stress the amplification circuitry in the headphones (it has to match the background sound level, but with the opposite phase waveform). I've tried it and it worked, but I'm not keen to push the friendship. Besides, my nice $400 headphones don't really belong in a workshop.

I can get the same cancellation and listen to tunes while routing by wearing some cheaper bluetooth earbuds under regular ear defenders.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

.......
So I'm wondering how well noise cancelling works as ear defence. Sony have just released some new $550 Headphones which are obviously aimed at mid-range quality (because Bluetooth just can't carry the signal of very high resolution music....yet), .......

Hi FF

I would question your statement about bluetooth. My darling is deaf and routinely wears earphones while watching TV or listening to music. I occasionally borrow her spare headphones because the sound quality is so good. In my opinion, to match the sound quality of her Sennheisers (c.$700) with conventional speakers you would have to spend in excess of $10,000. Cordless headphones do not mean lowering of sound quality.

Secondly, about five years ago, I bought a second hand set of Bose noise cancelling headphones from a pawn shop - yeh, I know, supporting the local fence! At first I loved them and thought they were brilliant in the workshop, but they are strangely dis-orientating - see Bob's post - quite irritating and I quickly started to hate them. They were Gumtreed after a month, luckily without any serious events.

FF, quite possibly they will work for you where they did not work for me. Would it be possible for you to borrow a set to try, or maybe buy a cheap (throw-away) set to trial?


Cheers

Graeme

Hi Graeme, what I meant by that statement is not that Bluetooth HPs are not good quality sound, but that they don't have the capacity (just yet) to carry high resolution music signals. A standard CD is 16 bit depth, and 44,100Hz sampling - Super Audio CDs are hi res with 24 bit depth and up to 192,000Hz sampling. Some are even higher. A 10 minute track at 24/176,000 has over 500MB size, even compressed to 50%. Generally speaking that is more than an entire regular CD, and even Bluetooth 4.2 can't carry that much info.

Thanks FF, but, with respect, perhaps you are putting technology ahead of reality.

I do not know what format of wifi that Sennheiser and other medium to high quality headphone makers use - bluetooth or something else. Dollar for dollar you will get a far better sound from headphones. In my experience the trade off is above 10:1 - a dollar spent on headphones will give better sound quality than $10 spent on speakers.

The ears speaketh louder than the maths!

I have a pair of wireless Sennheiser over head jobbies that I bought for use in the office. They are noise cancelling and seem to work well with the function either on or off (a little too good in the office as it’s handy to be able to hear conversations or when someone is trying to talk to you).

Anyway - as of late I have been bringing them home on the weekend. I find them really handy for general around the house / garden jobs as the wireless connection to the phone means no tangles - sound quality is also miles ahead of the standard IPod supplied in ear headphones.

On the weekend I was doing an extended sanding season with the headphones on. By Sunday night I certainly got the feeling that they were not as effective as proper earmuffs.

No major issues, but it left me thinking it would be better to invest in a pair of the earmuffs with Bluetooth built in. Also not keen on having $300+ headphones out in the shed so I might invest in some shed music muffs.

Much of my music is in high res - more or less unplayable on Bluetooth (headphones or speakers) and needs a cable to carry the signal properly. That will improve with future generations of BT. A cable is of course a bit of a pita in the workshop, but can be made to work using a short cable to a DAP in my pocket....but there's still a cable to catch on things. However, wireless HPs are a much better idea, and tbh, the sound quality isn't as important as when I'm at my desk, where I use a pair of wired Focal Stellia HPs or wired Hedd Studio Monitors.

I wouldn't reasonably expect these noise cancellers to completely wipe out a ROS plus a vac anyway, so it would just be a case of playing lower res music on them. I could probably get away with 24 bit 96kHz sampling I imagine. Certainly I've had problems with 176kHz music using BT 3.0 - blank spots and garbling. I've also noticed that the Koss BT HPs I have get interfered with up on the Great Western Highway - maybe due to all the BT in various cars passing by?

Just on the subject of cables, there are many audiophiles who are prepared to spend staggering money on a 1.5 metre long cable. You can pay USD700 for an 8 strand solid silver braided cable. Or perhaps Sir would prefer the Palladium version for USD1600? You and I may think there is no difference, but they say that the sound stage that comes with it is simply amazing. In due course I may spring for 8 strand Copper jobbie. Arctic Cables. Certainly the cable that came with the Stellias is very disappointing, with the amount of microphonics that get transferred.

Originally Posted by Sir Stinkalot

....a pair of the earmuffs with Bluetooth built in.

Only if you are prepared to put up with the tinniest sound you've heard since the 1970s! I bought a pair of the 3M ones, and the sound quality is ridiculously poor, and using a 3.5mm cable with them doesn't help either. As far as ear defence goes they are excellent.

Certainly not expecting sensational sound from the earmuffs with bluetooth, but at the end of the day if I am in the shed (doing shed stuff) I would be prepared to put quality of sound second to protecting my ears.
So to answer your initial question - based on my experience NC headphones didn't offer enough protection for my liking when doing basic sanding tasks.

Here is a video by Marc Spagnola (The Wood Whisperer) on bluetooth earbuds ...



I followed his recommendation of the Jaybird X3. I thought that they are okay for sound. Not in the same class as either my Bose or Apple, but reasonably comfortable, quite cheap, and reasonable sound protection.

Note: I do not use them anymore as I consider music while using machines to be dangerous. I listen to speakers while working with hand tools.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Much of my music is in high res - more or less unplayable on Bluetooth (headphones or speakers) and needs a cable to carry the signal properly. That will improve with future generations of BT. A cable is of course a bit of a pita in the workshop, but can be made to work using a short cable to a DAP in my pocket....but there's still a cable to catch on things. However, wireless HPs are a much better idea, and tbh, the sound quality isn't as important as when I'm at my desk, where I use a pair of wired Focal Stellia HPs or wired Hedd Studio Monitors.

I wouldn't reasonably expect these noise cancellers to completely wipe out a ROS plus a vac anyway, so it would just be a case of playing lower res music on them. I could probably get away with 24 bit 96kHz sampling I imagine. Certainly I've had problems with 176kHz music using BT 3.0 - blank spots and garbling. I've also noticed that the Koss BT HPs I have get interfered with up on the Great Western Highway - maybe due to all the BT in various cars passing by?

Just on the subject of cables, there are many audiophiles who are prepared to spend staggering money on a 1.5 metre long cable. You can pay USD700 for an 8 strand solid silver braided cable. Or perhaps Sir would prefer the Palladium version for USD1600? You and I may think there is no difference, but they say that the sound stage that comes with it is simply amazing. In due course I may spring for 8 strand Copper jobbie. Arctic Cables. Certainly the cable that came with the Stellias is very disappointing, with the amount of microphonics that get transferred.

$1500 for a Audio Cable my ,sense of reality is seriously warped.
Wow.

Cheers Matt.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

???

Just on the subject of cables, there are many audiophiles who are prepared to spend staggering money on a 1.5 metre long cable. You can pay USD700 for an 8 strand solid silver braided cable. Or perhaps Sir would prefer the Palladium version for USD1600? You and I may think there is no difference, but they say that the sound stage that comes with it is simply amazing. In due course I may spring for 8 strand Copper jobbie. Arctic Cables. Certainly the cable that came with the Stellias is very disappointing, with the amount of microphonics that get transferred.

Brett, back in the early 80s, when I was interested enough to spend largish sums on hifi - soon to be replaced and sustained by spending on wood - cabling for speakers, turntables, and even moving coil cartridges, was becoming common place. I spent some time making my own cables, exploring different thicknesses of single strand copper cable, or silver cable (the latter for inter-connects), the number of twists for multiple single strands for speaker cable runs ..... Even my usually-amused-and-cynical wife agreed that significant differences - and improvements - could be had. None of this was too terribly expensive if you purchased the raw material and rolled your own rather than a finished product. Looking back now, however, I do wonder how much is the equivalent of Stanley vs Lie Nielsen?

Regards from Perth

Derek (who still has much of his 80’s equipment)

Yes, it's all subjective of course, and very much dependent upon your age and condition of hearing. They also talk about speakers, Headphones, cables and even electronic devices needing to be run in. For example, my Hedd studio monitors apparently require 80 hours running time to loosen up.

One other new(ish) aspect of Hi-Fi is Balanced outputs for amps and speakers/HPs, where instead of sharing a common earth (so a headphone jack has 3 bands on it - L,R,E), each channel has its own earth, so there are four bands on the jack. When I purchased the Stellias I also needed a Headphone Amp (or Pre-Amp) to go with it, and chose a Schiit Joyunheim (no typo in the name there, and they do have considerable fun with the marketing of it - no schiit). It has a balanced circuit, and one day a couple of months ago I did a head to head listening to balanced and then unbalanced and back to balanced. Depending on the track (quality, music type) there is an absolutely huge difference between the two in terms of Sound Stage, bass response, and overall clarity. Mind you, as someone on a forum pointed out, that could be due to Schiit putting better components into the Balanced side, and leaving the unbalanced cheap.

I have gone for cables with XLR connections, and balanced across the board - I'm extremely happy with the result.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Looking back now, however, I do wonder how much is the equivalent of Stanley vs Lie Nielsen?

Well I guess that might depend on which Stanley era you look at!

Originally Posted by DerekCohen

...Looking back now, however, I do wonder how much is the equivalent of Stanley vs Lie Nielsen? ...

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

...
Well I guess that might depend on which Stanley era you look at!

Current millenium, no contest!