3 ms·

It sounds like (pun intended) one side of them was not working as described. The green end was designed to block out all sound. The yellow end, signaling

by 1970-01-01 3y ago

It sounds like (pun intended) one side of them was not working as described. The green end was designed to block out all sound. The yellow end, signaling “whisper mode,” purported to block out loud sound — but allowed the user to hear quieter noises, like conversations. My source is hear (hah): https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/15/3m-legal-battle-combat-grade-earplugs.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/15/3m-legal-battle-combat-grade...

crazygringo 3y ago
Thanks for that. A lot of interesting details: > “The purpose of the creation of [the Combat Arms earplugs] was to collaborate with the military to solve one of the longest-standing problems they have had, that soldiers won’t wear their hearing protection around loud noises and in combat,” Rucker said. > Rucker said the plugs were designed in collaboration with the U.S. military and tested by the Air Force, Army, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and others. > “3M has purposefully skewed this data by relying on hearing standards that do not measure frequencies most affected by noise, concealing the hearing damage suffered by veterans,” said Bryan Aylstock and Chris Seeger, co-lead counsel for the service members and veterans, in a joint statement. > 3M disagreed with those claims, telling CNBC: “The data support what 3M has maintained throughout this litigation: the Combat Arms Earplugs version two were safe and effective to use. This has been confirmed by every independent, third-party organization that has tested the product, including the Army Research Lab, the Air Force Research lab, NIOSH, and others.” Ultimately, whose job should it be to determine whether or not they're defective? If the military tested them in advance and determined they met standards, and they were manufactured identically to what the military approved, should 3M be the one held responsible?
- hyperhello 3y ago
  If all of that is true, it’s arbitrary whether 3M is part of the military or not, and can be held responsible.
- Nition 3y ago
  > soldiers won’t wear their hearing protection around loud noises and in combat I haven't been in combat, thankfully, but I assume the problem is that you also want to hear quiet sounds clearly, and others around you talking etc? In the audio world we would fix this with a compressor or a limiter. You set a loudness threshold and then reduce the component of the audio input that's above that threshold in volume by a fixed ratio, e.g. 4:1. A limiter is the same but the ratio is infinite (or near it), so the threshold becomes the maximum loudness. Basically, reduce the dynamic range. I wonder how much it would cost to have active processing like that integrated into hearing protection. I'm sure they've thought of it. Or maybe I'm thinking too fancy - maybe you could achieve the same thing without electronics. Loud sounds are just more pressure after all... could we have a little hole that's open in normal conditions but loud sounds push it closed? I know this is probably one of those things where "random idiot on hacker news thinks he has a new idea that we've of course already researched thoroughly in the industry" but if these exit it'd be cool to see, or if they don't it'd be cool to know why.
  - jiaaro 3y ago
    I’m not an industry expert either, but ear plugs don’t block sound taking other paths to the ear drum like bone conduction. The mix knob on this limiter can’t be turned to 100%
  - Auracle 3y ago
    Yeah, that’s absolutely already a thing for regular Joe Schmoe hearing protection. I have a pair. They’re big earmuff types though, not earplugs. I suppose they very well might exist now too. The fun thing about them is you can turn up the volume and essentially have super hearing while still keeping gun shots quiet.
    - Nition 3y ago
      Would you mind sharing the brand? I'd just like to look them up out of interest.
      - thesmok 3y ago
remarkEon 3y ago
I was in the Army for a while and used these all the time. I had no idea that the yellow vs green end was for different sound levels, wow.

crazygringo 3y ago

Thanks for that. A lot of interesting details: > “The purpose of the creation of [the Combat Arms earplugs] was to collaborate with the military to solve one of the longest-standing problems they have had, that soldiers won’t wear their hearing protection around loud noises and in combat,” Rucker said. > Rucker said the plugs were designed in collaboration with the U.S. military and tested by the Air Force, Army, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and others. > “3M has purposefully skewed this data by relying on hearing standards that do not measure frequencies most affected by noise, concealing the hearing damage suffered by veterans,” said Bryan Aylstock and Chris Seeger, co-lead counsel for the service members and veterans, in a joint statement. > 3M disagreed with those claims, telling CNBC: “The data support what 3M has maintained throughout this litigation: the Combat Arms Earplugs version two were safe and effective to use. This has been confirmed by every independent, third-party organization that has tested the product, including the Army Research Lab, the Air Force Research lab, NIOSH, and others.” Ultimately, whose job should it be to determine whether or not they're defective? If the military tested them in advance and determined they met standards, and they were manufactured identically to what the military approved, should 3M be the one held responsible?

hyperhello 3y ago
If all of that is true, it’s arbitrary whether 3M is part of the military or not, and can be held responsible.
Nition 3y ago
> soldiers won’t wear their hearing protection around loud noises and in combat I haven't been in combat, thankfully, but I assume the problem is that you also want to hear quiet sounds clearly, and others around you talking etc? In the audio world we would fix this with a compressor or a limiter. You set a loudness threshold and then reduce the component of the audio input that's above that threshold in volume by a fixed ratio, e.g. 4:1. A limiter is the same but the ratio is infinite (or near it), so the threshold becomes the maximum loudness. Basically, reduce the dynamic range. I wonder how much it would cost to have active processing like that integrated into hearing protection. I'm sure they've thought of it. Or maybe I'm thinking too fancy - maybe you could achieve the same thing without electronics. Loud sounds are just more pressure after all... could we have a little hole that's open in normal conditions but loud sounds push it closed? I know this is probably one of those things where "random idiot on hacker news thinks he has a new idea that we've of course already researched thoroughly in the industry" but if these exit it'd be cool to see, or if they don't it'd be cool to know why.
- jiaaro 3y ago
  I’m not an industry expert either, but ear plugs don’t block sound taking other paths to the ear drum like bone conduction. The mix knob on this limiter can’t be turned to 100%
- Auracle 3y ago
  Yeah, that’s absolutely already a thing for regular Joe Schmoe hearing protection. I have a pair. They’re big earmuff types though, not earplugs. I suppose they very well might exist now too. The fun thing about them is you can turn up the volume and essentially have super hearing while still keeping gun shots quiet.
  - Nition 3y ago
    Would you mind sharing the brand? I'd just like to look them up out of interest.
    - thesmok 3y ago

remarkEon 3y ago

I was in the Army for a while and used these all the time. I had no idea that the yellow vs green end was for different sound levels, wow.