ANR Headsets
Well, if you want to call an attention to detail, nit picking... 
But you are absolutely right - when I said 'ANR headsets', I was thinking just about the Bose. I'm happy to be corrected.
But you are absolutely right - when I said 'ANR headsets', I was thinking just about the Bose. I'm happy to be corrected.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with passive attenuation is that nobody has yet done it well without a lot of earcup pressure.
Many people find this does their head in, after an hour or more.
Now, aviation is full of hardened hacks who are happy to fly with a leather helmet and goggles in an open cockpit, while working out the next compass heading and stopwatch time with the slide rule, and occassionally popping down to check the road signs. So, many people on pilot forums don't have a problem with having their head clamped in a vice, and that is fair enough, so long as you appreciate that if you take a girl (or indeed any "normal" person) up in the plane a crappy headset isn't to make a good impression...
As well as doing her head in, and if it is bad enough - and many headsets in common GA club usage really are very bad - communication is going to be not very good.
Every time I fly I hear people on the radio whose communication is clearly marginal, and I am not talking about phraseology.
Bose deliver very good performance, and the downside is that if the battery goes flat the end result is a bit worse than a £300 D/Clarke, but probably no worse than the usual crappy headset. The other 99% of the time, or 100% if you carry a spare battery, you enjoy the superior performance and comfort.
I flew for 2 years with the battery powered version and never had a battery go flat. And the current model lasts several times longer than the old one did.
I am not for a moment suggesting the Bose is good value for money. I think it's a ripoff, and they are cashing in on being the best. What amazes me (as an electronics engineer with a lot of audio circuit design background) is that nobody has yet matched it or improved on it. It can't be that hard to do. I guess that it is not in anybody's interest to bomb the aviation headset market.
Many people find this does their head in, after an hour or more.
Now, aviation is full of hardened hacks who are happy to fly with a leather helmet and goggles in an open cockpit, while working out the next compass heading and stopwatch time with the slide rule, and occassionally popping down to check the road signs. So, many people on pilot forums don't have a problem with having their head clamped in a vice, and that is fair enough, so long as you appreciate that if you take a girl (or indeed any "normal" person) up in the plane a crappy headset isn't to make a good impression...
As well as doing her head in, and if it is bad enough - and many headsets in common GA club usage really are very bad - communication is going to be not very good.
Every time I fly I hear people on the radio whose communication is clearly marginal, and I am not talking about phraseology.
Bose deliver very good performance, and the downside is that if the battery goes flat the end result is a bit worse than a £300 D/Clarke, but probably no worse than the usual crappy headset. The other 99% of the time, or 100% if you carry a spare battery, you enjoy the superior performance and comfort.
I flew for 2 years with the battery powered version and never had a battery go flat. And the current model lasts several times longer than the old one did.
I am not for a moment suggesting the Bose is good value for money. I think it's a ripoff, and they are cashing in on being the best. What amazes me (as an electronics engineer with a lot of audio circuit design background) is that nobody has yet matched it or improved on it. It can't be that hard to do. I guess that it is not in anybody's interest to bomb the aviation headset market.
Blah Blah Blah
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 49
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did any of you actualy look at the clarity aloft headset?
http://www.clarityaloft.com/
This should help with passive attenuation with out squeezing your eyeballs out of your head with tight ear cups.
I am considering getting a set to try. So if anyone has tried them what is your verdict?
If anyone wants a set let me know because I will be in the states at the end of August and woul dbe happy to bring some back to save on the shipping.
http://www.clarityaloft.com/
This should help with passive attenuation with out squeezing your eyeballs out of your head with tight ear cups.
I am considering getting a set to try. So if anyone has tried them what is your verdict?
If anyone wants a set let me know because I will be in the states at the end of August and woul dbe happy to bring some back to save on the shipping.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tried the other similar sort of thing: the Lightspeed Mach 1.
It worked very well but the slightest tug on the cable would pull out the earplug(s) enough to let all the noise in. I gather from some pilots in the USA that you really do need to spend the extra £50-100 on custom moulded earplugs for it.
The mike on it was far out the best I have used on any headset.
Due to it being in short supply when I bought it, I managed to offload it on Ebay to a pilot in the USA, for a reasonable price.
My guess is that these headsets are excellent for passengers. Especially a regular female passenger There is the obvious hygiene issue with the earplugs which are not really shareable.
It worked very well but the slightest tug on the cable would pull out the earplug(s) enough to let all the noise in. I gather from some pilots in the USA that you really do need to spend the extra £50-100 on custom moulded earplugs for it.
The mike on it was far out the best I have used on any headset.
Due to it being in short supply when I bought it, I managed to offload it on Ebay to a pilot in the USA, for a reasonable price.
My guess is that these headsets are excellent for passengers. Especially a regular female passenger
There is the obvious hygiene issue with the earplugs which are not really shareable.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently the best form of hearing protection available is a good passive headset used in combination with tailored ear plugs. These ear plugs contain a filter that allows the voice frequencies to be attenuated less than other frequencies. They are the only device that guarentees a level of noise attenuation. On paper the clarity aloft types seem to be equivalent. The idea of not having to wear a headset in hot weather is very attractive.
Whilst the Bose seems to operate within a wide frequency range, it seems that it offers no protection for frequencies out with that band whether the battery is flat or not. I have no idea what frequency range one is exposed to in a GA cockpit, but I would be surprised if all the noise in a GA cockpit lies within the Bose frequency band.
Flying schools as employers by law must ensure that their instructors have adequate hearing protection. It would be interesting if someone has done the research into this and actually determined the adequacy of popular headsets.
Whilst the Bose seems to operate within a wide frequency range, it seems that it offers no protection for frequencies out with that band whether the battery is flat or not. I have no idea what frequency range one is exposed to in a GA cockpit, but I would be surprised if all the noise in a GA cockpit lies within the Bose frequency band.
Flying schools as employers by law must ensure that their instructors have adequate hearing protection. It would be interesting if someone has done the research into this and actually determined the adequacy of popular headsets.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it seems that it offers no protection for frequencies out with that band whether the battery is flat or not
No, that really isn't the case. No protection? The Bose uses a light pressure earcup which as a result provides less attenuation than a typical mid-priced (say, £300) passive headset. But it is still a normal headset. Have you ever worn one?
A good number of people (passengers) have worn them without realising there is an on-off switch. Occassional poor passenger briefing is to blame for that, and I have been guilty of it once or twice too. Yet they didn't realise there was anything untoward.
Most of the noise in a piston plane is low frequency, and I would guess there are components up to a few kHz. I have a spectrum analyser so could have a quick look. Most of the noise near the top of that would be wind noise. However a lot of wind noise has a low frequency component coming from the prop blade turbulence. The Bose takes that all out well, and even crappy passive attenuation is good at removing high frequency noise. HF noise is really easy to suppress, using simple mechanical means. With voice reproduction needing only up to about 2-3kHz (in this context; the telephone network only goes up to that anyway) one doesn't need to use ANR for HF attenuation; any old piece of foam around the ear does that nicely.
You people need to visit a headset shop that has an aircraft noise source. I believe Headset Services at Shoreham do that. They certainly used to c. 2000/1; I went through most of their headset range in an hour and two headsets stood out clearly: the Bose X (£800 then) and a £500 D/Clarke 10-13X or something like that. The D/C was a bit better on overall attenuation but had a much higher earcup pressure. All the others were poor in comparison.
There have been some newcomers since then, which I can't speak for.
No, that really isn't the case. No protection? The Bose uses a light pressure earcup which as a result provides less attenuation than a typical mid-priced (say, £300) passive headset. But it is still a normal headset. Have you ever worn one?
A good number of people (passengers) have worn them without realising there is an on-off switch. Occassional poor passenger briefing is to blame for that, and I have been guilty of it once or twice too. Yet they didn't realise there was anything untoward.
Most of the noise in a piston plane is low frequency, and I would guess there are components up to a few kHz. I have a spectrum analyser so could have a quick look. Most of the noise near the top of that would be wind noise. However a lot of wind noise has a low frequency component coming from the prop blade turbulence. The Bose takes that all out well, and even crappy passive attenuation is good at removing high frequency noise. HF noise is really easy to suppress, using simple mechanical means. With voice reproduction needing only up to about 2-3kHz (in this context; the telephone network only goes up to that anyway) one doesn't need to use ANR for HF attenuation; any old piece of foam around the ear does that nicely.
You people need to visit a headset shop that has an aircraft noise source. I believe Headset Services at Shoreham do that. They certainly used to c. 2000/1; I went through most of their headset range in an hour and two headsets stood out clearly: the Bose X (£800 then) and a £500 D/Clarke 10-13X or something like that. The D/C was a bit better on overall attenuation but had a much higher earcup pressure. All the others were poor in comparison.
There have been some newcomers since then, which I can't speak for.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ANR headsets
I was training in the US in April and I bought the David Clark H10 13X. I find it great, fits well, nice and comfortable and the ANR device works really well. All said though, its the first headset ive bought so nothing to compare it to but no complaints so far. I just went on the basis of buying the best I could afford. Cost $610 I think.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At one point I used to have a set of DC 10-13X ANRs, a pair of Bose and a pair of DC X11s, so I've been able to compare all three reasonably extensively.
By far the worst of all were the X11s. Fortunately I bought them from a retailer who kindly offered me a full refund when he heard I was selling them second-hand shortly after buying them. Although they were reasonably sturdy and as comfortable as the Bose, the attenuation was terrible. Aviation Consumer recently did a test of ANR headsets and the X11s scored very poorly.
I now keep a pair of the DC 10-13Xs and a pair of the Bose permanently in the aircraft. As IO540 said, the attenuation on the DCs is a little better, but the clamping force is much higher than the Bose. The ANR on the Bose is very good at removing the low frequencies, but the passive attenuation on the DCs is better at removing the high frequencies as well. Because the high frequencies are important in making out human speech, I find I can understand ATC more easily and hence keep the radio volume lower when I'm using the DCs. For that reason they're generally my preferred set. Having said that, if I'm flying more than three hours or so, I'll use the Bose instead as they are far more comfortable for that length of time.
Incidentally, one other noticable difference is that if I'm playing music through the intercom, the sound through the Bose is much, much better than the DCs. Listening to music through the DCs reminds me of the old Dial-a-Disc days.
On the Lightspeed / Clarity Aloft question, Robert Goyer recently wrote up a long-term comparison of the two in Flyer magazine. He tried out the custom ear moulds, but didn't find they worked very well. Of the two, he preferred the Clarity Aloft set.
By far the worst of all were the X11s. Fortunately I bought them from a retailer who kindly offered me a full refund when he heard I was selling them second-hand shortly after buying them. Although they were reasonably sturdy and as comfortable as the Bose, the attenuation was terrible. Aviation Consumer recently did a test of ANR headsets and the X11s scored very poorly.
I now keep a pair of the DC 10-13Xs and a pair of the Bose permanently in the aircraft. As IO540 said, the attenuation on the DCs is a little better, but the clamping force is much higher than the Bose. The ANR on the Bose is very good at removing the low frequencies, but the passive attenuation on the DCs is better at removing the high frequencies as well. Because the high frequencies are important in making out human speech, I find I can understand ATC more easily and hence keep the radio volume lower when I'm using the DCs. For that reason they're generally my preferred set. Having said that, if I'm flying more than three hours or so, I'll use the Bose instead as they are far more comfortable for that length of time.
Incidentally, one other noticable difference is that if I'm playing music through the intercom, the sound through the Bose is much, much better than the DCs. Listening to music through the DCs reminds me of the old Dial-a-Disc days.
On the Lightspeed / Clarity Aloft question, Robert Goyer recently wrote up a long-term comparison of the two in Flyer magazine. He tried out the custom ear moulds, but didn't find they worked very well. Of the two, he preferred the Clarity Aloft set.
Blah Blah Blah
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 49
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One set of Clarity Aloft's ordered. you cant have them shipped to the UK though!!! so I will pick them up from my friends at the end of Aug when I go to the US.
I will let you all know what they are like compared to DC 10-13x
I will let you all know what they are like compared to DC 10-13x
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Gods Chosen Country
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sennheiser
there is a new model sennheiser ANR headset out that look to be much improved mechanically over the old ones and similar to the Bose with a much reduced price at <£400 in the UK. I am considering replacing my DC passive set with one of these.
But I do agree with earlier comments that you need to try out the active aspect before deciding. I found a considerable difference over a range of domestic type sets when I was looking for one to use when travelling freight.
I have tried the Bose and found them good but baulked at the £600 (recently reduced too) price tag and even $1000 in the US. But I expect the prices wil drop further if the Sennheiser proves to offer the same level of active
performance
But I do agree with earlier comments that you need to try out the active aspect before deciding. I found a considerable difference over a range of domestic type sets when I was looking for one to use when travelling freight.
I have tried the Bose and found them good but baulked at the £600 (recently reduced too) price tag and even $1000 in the US. But I expect the prices wil drop further if the Sennheiser proves to offer the same level of active
performance
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another factor is how good the mike is.
The mike has to deliver good speech reproduction (many quite obviously don't) but also has to have good noise cancelling behaviour.
All aviation headsets have NC mikes but some are better than others. Any un-cancelled noise at the mike will be heard in the headset - not what you are paying for!!
Recently, I upgraded a couple of my 4 Bose ~ 1999-2002 headsets to the current mike (which incidentally has about 2.5x higher output, measured on a linear millivolt scale) and on the next flight was concerned that the engine wasn't making full power. The indications (fuel flow, IAS, etc) were spot on, and eventually I realised it was wholly due to the new mikes having much better noice cancellation. Yet, the old headsets were still miles better than anything else out there.
Further evidence for how good the Bose is now comes from making the occassional movie, when a miniature mike is tucked inside the earcup. (For best results, the camcorder needs to have a manual audio recording level control). Now, the recordings are almost silent, except for the intended speech.
Bose had a big "incident" a few years back when they shipped out a huge number of duff mikes. They fixed the headsets under a specially extended warranty but (gosh what a suprise) this was severely under-publicised in Europe and also they washed their hands of it a lot faster over here. Even with the duff mikes the headsets were better than the other brands, but it does show up with some intercoms. I am puzzled about the full extent of this mike business because I recently had all four of my headsets tested by a Bose dealer and all four were the same, 2.5x too low on mike output, and they were made over a 2-3 year period..... It's possible this was a well covered up manufacturing error which actually went on for a long time. I would not buy a used Bose unless it has the new mike, otherwise it's another £130+VAT.
Bose are way overpriced for the content of the product but I suppose if one takes a long term view of one's flying life.... I would not recommend a 1 hour PPL student getting one.
The mike has to deliver good speech reproduction (many quite obviously don't) but also has to have good noise cancelling behaviour.
All aviation headsets have NC mikes but some are better than others. Any un-cancelled noise at the mike will be heard in the headset - not what you are paying for!!
Recently, I upgraded a couple of my 4 Bose ~ 1999-2002 headsets to the current mike (which incidentally has about 2.5x higher output, measured on a linear millivolt scale) and on the next flight was concerned that the engine wasn't making full power. The indications (fuel flow, IAS, etc) were spot on, and eventually I realised it was wholly due to the new mikes having much better noice cancellation. Yet, the old headsets were still miles better than anything else out there.
Further evidence for how good the Bose is now comes from making the occassional movie, when a miniature mike is tucked inside the earcup. (For best results, the camcorder needs to have a manual audio recording level control). Now, the recordings are almost silent, except for the intended speech.
Bose had a big "incident" a few years back when they shipped out a huge number of duff mikes. They fixed the headsets under a specially extended warranty but (gosh what a suprise) this was severely under-publicised in Europe and also they washed their hands of it a lot faster over here. Even with the duff mikes the headsets were better than the other brands, but it does show up with some intercoms. I am puzzled about the full extent of this mike business because I recently had all four of my headsets tested by a Bose dealer and all four were the same, 2.5x too low on mike output, and they were made over a 2-3 year period..... It's possible this was a well covered up manufacturing error which actually went on for a long time. I would not buy a used Bose unless it has the new mike, otherwise it's another £130+VAT.
Bose are way overpriced for the content of the product but I suppose if one takes a long term view of one's flying life.... I would not recommend a 1 hour PPL student getting one.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation Consumer recently did a review of all ANRs and confirmed what we already knew.
Bose-X headsets are the way forward.
AV Consumer uses lab tests and a panel of folks to do real live comparisons. They also get feedback from sellers. They commented that a lot of people send their DC11s back.
Draw your own conclusion.
You can pick up Bose-X headsets a lot less expensive now than a few years back (£550sh)
Bose-X headsets are the way forward.
AV Consumer uses lab tests and a panel of folks to do real live comparisons. They also get feedback from sellers. They commented that a lot of people send their DC11s back.
Draw your own conclusion.
You can pick up Bose-X headsets a lot less expensive now than a few years back (£550sh)
