Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 122 posts

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#61

Post by thadk »

"So they used a remote acoustic sensing system built around a laser Doppler vibrometer (LDV), which measures non-contact vibrations over a wide range. In their tests, they placed a tiny, jewelry-sized, retro-reflective membrane in the ear as a pick-up for the LDV." These sound curious: these are the devices that three letter agencies have used to suss out sound from glass, aren't they?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Doppler_vibrometer "Security – Laser Doppler vibrometers (LDVs) as non-contact vibration sensors have an ability of remote voice acquisition"

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#63

Post by ngneer »

PurpleFoxy wrote: post #58
chii wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the simple, signal-processing oriented way to noise cancellation. But what if the software/ai is advanced enough to reproduce a sound, but erase a certain aspect of it? Like how photo editing can edit out an object or background? Then the headphones can use a seal to completely block out all noise, and play only the sounds the user selects!

I think you have misunderstood the parent comment. The suggestion isn’t to create configurable anc headphones but instead to create a device that is able to cancel out the sound of your voice from the ears of other people around you so you can speak in public privately. The problem is you can’t possibly work out exactly how and when the sound will hit each set of ears around you to be able to direct a beam of sound t…

I never said it would be easy, but you make a good point. Compensating based on other sets of ears would be tough, because their locations are unknown and change fast.

Directional sound is possible to an extent, Woody Norris gave a TED talk about it a long while back, it is called hypersonic sound. I think it uses ultrasound to generate compressions and rarefactions far away. I realize it sounds like science fiction, but you could perhaps transduce sound to electricity and again to sound, sending the signal of your voice away from you faster than the speed of sound, in time for a cancellation wave to be generated and have an effect. I suppose the analogy would be quiescing a ripple in a pond.

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#64

Post by mortenjorck »

PurpleFoxy wrote: post #58
chii wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the simple, signal-processing oriented way to noise cancellation. But what if the software/ai is advanced enough to reproduce a sound, but erase a certain aspect of it? Like how photo editing can edit out an object or background? Then the headphones can use a seal to completely block out all noise, and play only the sounds the user selects!

I think you have misunderstood the parent comment. The suggestion isn’t to create configurable anc headphones but instead to create a device that is able to cancel out the sound of your voice from the ears of other people around you so you can speak in public privately. The problem is you can’t possibly work out exactly how and when the sound will hit each set of ears around you to be able to direct a beam of sound t…

There was a product announced a few years back called Hushme that proposed to accomplish this goal. It attempted to create an acoustic seal around the wearer's mouth, and somewhat predictably, it looked ridiculous: https://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/wearables/this-ca...

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#65

Post by taneq »

chrisweekly wrote: post #56
JBiserkov wrote: post #3

>wearing active noise canceling headphones for extended periods of time can be uncomfortable and even cause injury Does anyone know what type(s) of injury is this referring to, how long is too long and how widespread/likely it is?

I'd love to learn more about this too! I wear Sennheiser HD1 M2's (with ANC) for ~8h/day, 5d/week, and have been for over 2 years -- with no discomfort or unwanted side- or after-effects. Ofc I'm careful about volume level, and I take frequent breaks from both screen and headphones (albeit for the sake of my eyes). I'm a healthy 47yo software architect by trade, also a lifelong musician and music afficionado. I care…

Likewise, some sources for audio damage from noise canceling would be great. I wear headphones 8+ hours a day for work. Around two months ago I upgraded my 10-year-old (cheap, wired) Sennheisers to some mid-range wireless ones with noise canceling, they're a bit heavier but otherwise just as comfortable and noise canceling is awesome for helping me focus. I've never had any negative effects from either (although I'm careful to keep the volume down).

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#66

Post by bryan0 »

thepostoffice wrote: post #47
evross wrote: post #41

ANC headphones are great for low-frequency (bass) sounds. But with cheap headphones I find I can still hear speech. I think new housing uses mass loaded vinyl to prevent high frequency sounds from passing through walls - perhaps heavy, 1lb or 1kg headphones with ANC are the solution for experiencing real silence in e.g. a busy workspace? Does anyone have an idea if material weight or density is a big factor in sound…

In general, anything heavy related to headphones = bad. You can get the equivalent of state of the art ANC performance with a pair of passive IEM's that fit properly. Try using memory foam tips if you have trouble with tips fitting your ear shape.

Yeah I totally agree. I get that people find them uncomfortable, but passive IEM's to me are way more comfortable than a heavy over-ear set which puts pressure against the sides of my skull. The noise canceling is also amazing without any electronics. Only trick is getting really good drivers in such a small space but IEM manufactures have been doing this for decades with great results.

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#67

Post by bryan0 »

tux3 wrote: post #42
chii wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the simple, signal-processing oriented way to noise cancellation. But what if the software/ai is advanced enough to reproduce a sound, but erase a certain aspect of it? Like how photo editing can edit out an object or background? Then the headphones can use a seal to completely block out all noise, and play only the sounds the user selects!

If we could make a seal that blocks out all noise small (and confortable) enough to fit around a headset, we wouldn't need the whole NC setup. Earplugs below my bose headset work wonder to block out anything short of cataclysmic, but it's hardly practical. And I can't exactly play music with those on...

It's funny because the best passive noise canceling IEMs are basically ear plugs with drivers in them. Blocks background noise as well as ANC but only weigh a few grams.

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#68

Post by ngneer »

mortenjorck wrote: post #64
PurpleFoxy wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have misunderstood the parent comment. The suggestion isn’t to create configurable anc headphones but instead to create a device that is able to cancel out the sound of your voice from the ears of other people around you so you can speak in public privately. The problem is you can’t possibly work out exactly how and when the sound will hit each set of ears around you to be able to direct a beam of sound t…

There was a product announced a few years back called Hushme that proposed to accomplish this goal. It attempted to create an acoustic seal around the wearer's mouth, and somewhat predictably, it looked ridiculous: https://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/wearables/this-ca...

Neat, but weird. Muzzleme is more like it.

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#69

Post by ben-schaaf »

the__alchemist wrote: post #22
mattmaroon wrote: post #7

My new Ram 2500 diesel has active noise canceling and is the quietest ICE vehicle I’ve ever been in. Probably quieter than electric vehicles at high speeds.

Apparently electric vehicles like Tesla are noisy on the highway, where external noises dominate; due to less sound-deadening material to save weight.

What what I've heard the ID3 actually has more sound-deadening than normal and the LEAF's mirrors were designed to cause less wind noise.

Re: Noise-canceling headphones without the headphone

#70

Post by strogonoff »

thepostoffice wrote: post #55
vermilingua wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try getting an employer to fork out for IEMs when $300 headphones “do the job”.

You can get a decent set for about a hundred bucks.

Shure SE215 is less than a hundred!

That said, like with most IEMs, sleeves should be replaced sometimes (probably once a month or if you get any dirt on them—be careful with handling and don’t let that stuff get into your ear canal), so that should be factored in the price.

Which sleeves you choose makes a big difference—they are more or less the noise isolation part of IEMs, and they make or break your comfort when wearing. I swear by the combination of SE215 + Shure’s original black foam sleeves (or, if those cannot be obtained, Westone’s foam eartips). Passive noise isolation in this setup is better than ANC in AirPods Pro for me subjectively (although according to rtings.com’s measurements they go head to head), and is easy to wear for long periods of time.

(I guess I’m replying to thepostoffice but for the most part this is addressed to dghughes’s upstream post.)

Post reply on HN