Technology

58164 readers

3386 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

469

Students’ Leaf Blower Suppressor To Hit Retail (hackaday.com)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

135 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Your calculation was about energy. But the calculation of energy is next to useless when you are trying to compare two different noises. You need to care about perception.

The perception of noise is quite complicated. But as a rule of thumb: when some noise changes by -10dB, then you hear it about "half as loud".

Source: I have a university degree in acoustics.

So for the reduction of -12dB here, it will be perceived as "nearly half as loud". Very different than the "94%" is suggesting.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

It’s also only 2db overall, the one frequency they dropped that much.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We agree that the -12dB is what's important for human hearing ... Now, you may agree that the 94% reduction is what counts regarding engineering // fabrication // design.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We agree that the -12dB is what's important for human hearing ... Now, you may agree that the 94% reduction is what counts regarding engineering // fabrication // design.

-2db* and 37%*

Why are you perpetuating the wrong information?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The snippet quoted in the original comments and referenced in subsequent comments refers specifically to the decibel reduction of the frequencies being targeted by the invention, not the volume of the overall sound.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

Is it? Because the next sentence in the paragraph (and the only sentence missing in the quote) is the overall sound reduction. Which is far more important and far less misleading than saying 12db and 94% quieter.

Its intentionally misleading to deceive people, and than the general public incorrectly defends it, this is you.