Talk:Absolute threshold of hearing

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Acoustics Taskforce.

Merged threshold of hearing and threshold of pain into this article.

That was no good idea, sorry! It goes wrong when you go to other languages.

Zara 15 Oct, 2005

The statement "Prolonged exposure to sound pressure levels in excess of the threshold of pain can cause physical damage" is incorrect, as it has been proved that prolonged exposure to much lower pressure levels (already from 90 dB, and probably below) are enough to damage our hearing!

Xenomorph [DNS-Studios], 11 Nov 2005

Perhaps "Prolonged exposure to sound pressure levels that cause temporary threshold shift can cause physical damage" is the appropriate phrasing. It looks like we need an article on temporary threshold shift. Wesley R. Elsberry 05:39, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dBSPL is wrong[edit]

Other sites using the "dB re" formalism: Oceans of Noise (explicit in defining SPL and SIL in terms of "dB re"), SURTASS LFA, NIST listing SPL in terms of "dB re", and Acoustic Impacts on Marine Mammals. But the best thing I've found has to be ASACOS Rules for Preparation of American National Standards in ACOUSTICS, MECHANICAL VIBRATION AND SHOCK, BIOACOUSTICS, and NOISE, which states:

3.16 Unit symbols
3.16.1 When to use unit symbols
In the text of the standard, the unit symbol for a quantity shall be used only when the unit is preceded by a numeral. When the unit is not preceded by a numeral, spell out the name of the unit. In text, even when a numerical value is given, it is desirable to spell out the name of the unit. Moreover, the name shall be spelled out when it first appears in the text, and more often if the text is lengthy.
Thus, in text write "...a sound pressure level of 73 dB; or "...a sound pressure level of 73 decibels." Do not write "sound pressure level in dB"; the correct form is "sound pressure level in decibels." Do not write "dB levels", "dB readings", or "dB SPL."
Levels or readings are not of decibels; they are of sound pressure levels or some other acoustical quantity. Write out the word "decibel" for such applications, and be sure that the word 'decibel' follows, not precedes the description of the relevant acoustical quantity.

The guidelines given for the National Standards clearly excludes the use of "dB SPL". Wesley R. Elsberry 17:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But that is silly because the decibel is just a ratio, not a measurement unit of sound or anything else. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Threshold of pain table[edit]

Is there a reason that some of the data on the threshold of pain table is bold? I would have edited for consistancy if there was no reason for it.

I assume they are specific standards, etc. I asked that references be added for each value. — Omegatron 12:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sound Frequency in speech[edit]

I read here: http://www.smeter.net/daily-facts/4/fact2.php

That the "Average male voice audio spectrum power peaks near 500 Hz." Looking at the threshold chart it starts at 1000Hz. Am I mistaken or shouldn't that chart have measurements below 1000Hz to take into account the human voice spectrum? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.165.124.110 (talk) 07:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Why can I hear below 20 Hz?[edit]

Why does everyone say that the audible frequency range is 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz? Where is a good source for this information?

Can anyone please offer an educated explanation for the following? I downloaded a program (BrainWave Generator) to produce sine waves at specific frequencies with precise Hz values. I generated a sine wave which begins above 20 Hz and descends to 0 Hz. I can hear something the entire time. So can my Mom. When it gets to a low Hz value, around and below 20 Hz, the sine wave is no longer heard clearly as a low tone, but instead as a very high-pitched tone. The high-pitched tone can be discerned very clearly, albeit quietly, and is not random white noise static, as it changes precisely with the Hz value. The sound is heard whether I use conventional headphones or ear buds, though I haven't adequately tested using normal speakers, as the speakers on my laptop are very poor quality and the sine wave is not very audible.

My theories are:

The noise heard might have something to do with an effect relating to volume amplification of the sine wave done by the headphones or computer hardware or operating system.
It might be some strange quality of the BrainWave Generator software and possibly unintended.
If it is not due to any consequence of programming or hardware, I wonder if the noise heard is a higher octave harmonic resonance physically generated by vibrations originating from the low Hz sine wave.
I wonder if hearing sound at such a frequency might use different parts of the head to sense the sound, such as through vibrating skull bones or something, and thus it is perceived differently than sound in a normal range.

--— sloth_monkey 21:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What you're hearing is most likely distortion generated by your playback system. --Kvng (talk) 03:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is very likely - the low frequency resonates at higher frequencies, which they likely heard. Nevertheless, this is a good question: the 20-20khz is very frequently mentioned, but the source isn't. 2001:14BA:2BE5:7A00:C837:DBFB:2B6E:EC1B (talk) 06:51, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the first image[edit]

I have tried to trace the first image to the source. However, I ended up on this page that states _itself_ as the source: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Leeftijdgehoordrempel.png . Can we actually find the origin? 94.230.134.149 (talk) 12:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Absolute threshold of hearing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Absolute threshold of hearing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090220083418/http://www.diracdelta.co.uk/science/source/t/h/threshold%20of%20hearing/source.html to http://www.diracdelta.co.uk/science/source/t/h/threshold%20of%20hearing/source.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:01, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Absolute threshold of hearing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20000930185240/http://www.meridian-audio.com/ara/multips3.pdf to http://www.meridian-audio.com/ara/multips3.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:49, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10^-12 W/m^2 ?[edit]

All over the web I keep seeing the claim that 10^-12 W/m^2 is the threshold of human hearing. But I can't find any citation to the origin of this number (you can just google "10^-12 W/m^2" and get a lot of hits making the claim) or any explanation of how to interpret it, e.g. as a theoretical abstraction, or as a practical value.

This WP article doesn't mention it. Is it a practical value? i.e. how does it compare to thermal noise?

(https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110540/how-loud-is-the-thermal-motion-of-air-molecules/114132)

Any discussion either explaining or debunking it seems like it could be helpful, since the value seems to be widely used. DKEdwards (talk) 21:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]