Live data from Hacker News

There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

nytimes.com

181–190 of 304 posts

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#181
post #101

As one who can hear these sounds, I can attest to how maddening it is. It's even worse when (most of) the people around you can't hear it, and they don't believe you. Earplugs only make it worse, because they filter out ambient noise that otherwise helps distract you from the incessant hum. Daytime is not as bad as night because of the natural activity sounds of a city. I have read that waves and underwater currents…

I was plagued by the Hum for years. At times it became astonishingly loud. But I was able (eventually) to figure it out.

Short version: I made many attempts to track it down. Used low frequency Microphones, filters, amplifiers, etc, as well as PC Spectrogram programs to try and and visualise and record it. Visited many nearby industries etc to try and find it. But none of my attempts did any good.

As I'm a Radio Engineer I spent ages experimenting with VLF Receivers, Spectrum Analysers, etc.

One thing I noticed however was that the Hum was much worse when I was living in a quiet rural area.

One night however, I noticed that I could affect the hum by doing the swallow maneuver that divers use to equalise ear pressure. I slowly came to understand that my Hum was an internally generated sound.

Apparently there are various possible mechanisms: The simplest is blood flow near the ear. But also the tiny hairs in the ear canal actually have tiny muscles which cause feed-back or "regeneration" to make our ears more sensitive, and the frequency response of each hair cell much sharper. However at times, this regeneration can slip over into actual Oscillation.

This ability of the ear to actually generate sounds is well documented. It can actually be loud enough for a Doctor or a partner to hear. It's called Objective tinnitus.

In my case, the Hum eventually disappeared and has never returned. I suspect that it coincided with a change in blood pressure medication, but I can't be sure.

Looking back, I would suggest that it may be worth trying to amplify the sounds via a set of high-quality earphones and appropriate filters, etc, using the headphones as microphones.

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#182
post #101

As one who can hear these sounds, I can attest to how maddening it is. It's even worse when (most of) the people around you can't hear it, and they don't believe you. Earplugs only make it worse, because they filter out ambient noise that otherwise helps distract you from the incessant hum. Daytime is not as bad as night because of the natural activity sounds of a city. I have read that waves and underwater currents…

I can hear these sounds too. Earplugs definitely make it worse. I grew up in a small town right next to a huge military base and aircraft flyovers were a very frequent occurrence. To me the sound sort of reminds me of a really faint helicopter or really faint jet engine in the distance, just on the edge of hearing.

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#183
post #138
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few samples of amplitude should be able to triangulate it no?

I'd guess amplitude is massively affected by microphone sensitivity. This is not easy to measure and might depend on the direction. Consider: * The amount of walls between a mic and the outside. * The absorbance/reflection of nearby materials, including their shape (flat surface will reflect sounds amplifying certain directions). * The clutter between the source and receiver. Sound carries over water, not over cities…

It does require synchronization of the recordings, which might also be difficult.

Could you record with a multiple "microphone connected to a Raspberry Pi" setup, with the time synchronized using something like the NIST time signal[1] using an RTL-SDR, or a cellular signal, or GPS, or maybe using NTP?

[1]: https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-frequency-division/nist-ra...

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#184

We had a "hum" sound in cambridge MA. Its one of those sounds when you walk through you don't think anything of it, but if you live near it.... (I was one of the lucky as I couldn't hear it from my bedroom). Incredibly hard to track down, it was determined to be Fans on top of a building. And it was fixed. The sound bounces around so much, just walking around I couldn't pinpoint it on a couple nights of trying. Its w…

I'm also in Cambridge, for a long time they were replacing some pipes under my street. This would cause weird, seemingly ambient sounds.

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#185
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't recommend the Earthworks M50 for this application. Earthworks' design approach for these microphones is to maximize time domain performance by having excessive bandwidth, minimal phase distortion, and flat frequency response. In order to achieve this, they have to use a tiny condenser element, which has relatively low sensitivity and thus relatively high noise. If you're looking to measure things near or b…

Since you seem fairly knowledgeable about this subject, perhaps you could answer a related question I've been wondering: Would an effective low-cost way of measuring low frequencies (let's say ~20hz) be to use a subwoofer speaker (used as a microphone) hooked up to something that would amplify and recording of the signal? My reasoning is that they're naturally designed to work with low frequencies to begin with (more…

Yes, sub-woofer loudspeakers make excellent low-frequency microphones when used with a suitable pre-Amp. And using a PC with Spectrogram software is a great way to record and visualise the sounds.

However, please read my post above on what I actually found.

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#186
post #95
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does one eliminate the noise? One of those sensory deprivation chambers? Audio insulation?

There is nothing to insulate against these large, low frequency waves. They penetrate solid rock. Perhaps enough water could absorb the waves and dissipate them, but that's not really an option.

See my post above on tracking down these sounds, and how a anechoic chamber would actually make it worse. At least in my case.

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#187
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why install anything? Fly a drone around to take 5s recordings at points on a grid.

Wouldn't the sound of the drone be louder than the hum?

My assumption is that he would touch down first.

Re: There's a Persistent Hum in Windsor, Ontario, and No One Knows Why

#190
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't recommend the Earthworks M50 for this application. Earthworks' design approach for these microphones is to maximize time domain performance by having excessive bandwidth, minimal phase distortion, and flat frequency response. In order to achieve this, they have to use a tiny condenser element, which has relatively low sensitivity and thus relatively high noise. If you're looking to measure things near or b…

Since you seem fairly knowledgeable about this subject, perhaps you could answer a related question I've been wondering: Would an effective low-cost way of measuring low frequencies (let's say ~20hz) be to use a subwoofer speaker (used as a microphone) hooked up to something that would amplify and recording of the signal? My reasoning is that they're naturally designed to work with low frequencies to begin with (more…

You're right that you can use a speaker as a microphone, because they're pretty much dynamic microphones run in reverse. However, speakers are exceptionally low sensitivity when used as microphones. You could amplify them and get a usable signal level out of them, but the noise would probably be much worse than a purpose built microphone.

Microphone size doesn't really matter that much for low frequency sound. The Earthworks M50 suggested above? I wouldn't recommend it for this application because if you're going to spend a lot of money, it might as well be on something well-suited to the application. However, the approach it takes works and can be done for much less money. Cheap omnidirectional electrets go down pretty far[1], and you don't need the ruler flat response of the M50. You just need amplification circuitry that doesn't filter out the low frequency stuff you want.

DSP is commonly used to correct the frequency response of microphones. However, measuring frequency response is difficult and expensive.

[1] http://volcanomodels.sr.unh.edu/jbj/MICROPHONES/microphone_l...

Post reply on HN