Does anyone have any experience of the relative merits of active, noise
cancelling headphones as opposed to passive, ear canal type isolating
earphones ?

I want to get a set to use with an MP3 player on trains and planes. At
the same time I would also like to be able to use them with a radio at
motor race meetings.

My requirement is to be able to listen at sensible ( low) volumes.
Decent sound quality would be a bonus, but the main requirement is
actually be able to hear music/commentary.

My inclination is to go for something like the Shure E3 or Senheiser
equivalents. But how well will they work on a plane. I can always stick
a pair of ear defenders over the top at Le Mans etc..

How good are the active devices?

T.

On Sat, 3 Jun 2006 10:32:19 +0100, Tony Gartshore wrote:

Does anyone have any experience of the relative merits of active, noise
cancelling headphones as opposed to passive, ear canal type isolating
earphones ?

I want to get a set to use with an MP3 player on trains and planes. At
the same time I would also like to be able to use them with a radio at
motor race meetings.

My requirement is to be able to listen at sensible ( low) volumes.
Decent sound quality would be a bonus, but the main requirement is
actually be able to hear music/commentary.

My inclination is to go for something like the Shure E3 or Senheiser
equivalents. But how well will they work on a plane. I can always stick
a pair of ear defenders over the top at Le Mans etc..

How good are the active devices?

T.

Having tried both, I would go for the passive ear canal types that
double as ear plugs. I use Etymotic, but there are plenty around. They
are light and don't get in the way. On planes, if you fall asleep
wearing them they don't end up over your nose. Also the frequency
range over which the active types attenuate is rather limited.

There is another breed of active types with a specific application
which you can't duplicate with passives. This is the kind that samples
the repetitive background and slowly (over a second or so) builds a
cancelling signal. The background gets quieter, but transient stuff
from outside - warning horns, conversation etc., gets through
undiminished. This is useful for pilots, but such headsets are not
generally optimized for music.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Tony Gartshore wrote:
Does anyone have any experience of the relative merits of active,
noise cancelling headphones as opposed to passive, ear canal type
isolating earphones ?

I want to get a set to use with an MP3 player on trains and planes. At
the same time I would also like to be able to use them with a radio at
motor race meetings.

My requirement is to be able to listen at sensible ( low) volumes.
Decent sound quality would be a bonus, but the main requirement is
actually be able to hear music/commentary.

My inclination is to go for something like the Shure E3 or Senheiser
equivalents. But how well will they work on a plane. I can always
stick a pair of ear defenders over the top at Le Mans etc..

How good are the active devices?

T.

The cancelling type only work up to about 500Hz BUT that's the most
energy-rich part anyway. I found the best compromise is to use ear plugs
(general, full range reduction) WITH cancelling headphones, turned up LOUD.
It might make your neighbour worry about your listening levels but you get
the best of both worlds!

Good luck

Rolo

In article ,
says...
Having tried both, I would go for the passive ear canal types that
double as ear plugs. I use Etymotic, but there are plenty around. They
are light and don't get in the way. On planes, if you fall asleep
wearing them they don't end up over your nose. Also the frequency
range over which the active types attenuate is rather limited.


Thanks Don,

I've got a pair of the E6i(s) on order..

T.