EU plans further cut in iPod volume levels

Jonny Evans
|
September 25, 2009
|
Share

The EU preparing to pass new laws that will limit the maximum volume of iPods, iPhones and other MP3 players to an even lower extent than the current volume limitations.

Meglena Kuneva, the European Commissioner for Consumer Affairs, will unveil an EU mandate for all firms producing personal music devices.

It will state that in future all devices will have a built-in default level, said to be around 80 decibels. That’s 20 decibels lower than the 100 decibel maximum demanded by the EU be set on iPods which already ship in Europe.

As per usual, this new law is designed “for your protection”. Specifically, to protect hearing, following many warnings from multitudinous deafness charities, and recent evidence from a scientific committee which claimed up to 10 per cent of personal music player users risk permanent hearing loss by listening daily at high volume settings for five years.

The plans will be unveiled at a joint briefing by Commissioner Kuvena and the deaf charity RNID.

The announcement is expected to be made next week.

Comments (27)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 2:55am

what?!?

9to5Mac EU (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 3:00am

I am an eu citizen and I want that I (i repeat: I) have to decide how much put the volume up!
EU sucks.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 3:26am

This just shows that ministers don't know what they talk. I'm all for forcing manufacturers to give user option to lock maximum volume for their children. But for adults like me who use big headphones consuming lot of energy I need the volume to be pretty much cranked full to hear music. When I use my in ear phones, the volume is only about halfway.. and that shows the differences in headphones..

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 4:05am

problem solved, no more sound = no more hearing damage.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 4:15am

This is stupid. What if I want to use my iPod while mowing the lawn (something I do quite often)?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 7:39pm

People like you are why we don't need health insurance. Dumbass, you can get hearing damage from using lawn mowers without ear plugs, much less playing music loud enough to over power the mower engine.

basti (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 4:57am

So this means that music that has not been mastered to 10dB dynamic will be so silent, that you have no chance of hearing it on your earplugs while in public transportation. Or for musicians who like to record their rehearsals and listen back to them while on the bus, those guys can pretty much dump their mp3 player for that. What a load of crap!!

Oflife (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 5:38am

...in the 1980s, I attended a specific concert (Tangerine Dream) that was so loud it damaged my hearing permanently. (Loud electronic music is worse than rock due to the massive variation in frequencies, I assume anyway.) And if we're honest with ourselves, it is harder to hear soon after removing headphones, whether using them with an iPod or any other audio device.

We are, no matter how much we love our music, slowly going deaf a lot quicker than the pre Walkman & iPod generation.

What makes it worse is when turning up the volume to drown out external noise in a metropolis or under a flight path.

The only other alternative would be to use a timer system that would allow listening at any volume for say, 1 hour, and then the volume would automatically reduce for, say, 3 hours to allow the ears to recover.

What say you 9to5ers?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 8:50am

I say that hopefully the average consumer is smart enough to know whether or not their music is too loud, and know the risks of listening at high volumes for extended periods of time. Maximum volume levels should not be arbitrarily regulated.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 2:59pm

I should have the right to damage my hearing if I'd like. I don't need a nanny government or an out of touch politician to tell me how to protect myself. If I want to listen to my music at 158dB, then I should be able to listen to my music at 158dB. It sucks that you damaged your hearing, but it's your own damn fault. Should have brought some ear plugs.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 11:03am

Certainly a great idea, just please make it *optional* and do not force your solution upon 500 million people...

If we could agree with (admittedly very controversial) notion that they're *rightful owners* of the ears they were born with - then let them individually decide when to give these ears a rest.

ser (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 6:02am

there is a volume limit function in most of the ipods and other mp3 players. specifically for that. if i am listening to my ipod connected to the speakers that cannot sound any louder (for particular reasons) then all i can do is boost up the ipod volume. all i can say: idiots. think of something more useful. environment for instance.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 6:23am

So -20db? With what headphones? The ones that come with the unit? Headphones vary wildly with their efficiencies so how do they set a volume limit. They must be using a "standard" headphone, so if the maker includes energy sucking headphones then they'll never get the volume and of course the reverse is true. If they take into account the headphones being sold with the units than all the manufacturer has to do is reduce the headphone efficiency and leave the player alone.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 6:57am

Socialism, get used to it Americans, it has now invaded your country. At least there will be no need to think anymore, the government will do it for you.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 8:54am

Ummm... this is the EU we're talking about.. That stands for EUROPEAN Union. Dumbass republican.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 9:47am

LOL, I don't know if he's a Dumbass republican, but he is right about the socialism in the Union States of America.

He may not know the article is talking about the EU either, but it won't be long and where ever you live, you should know that this has more to do with socialism and similar thought processes than freedom or anything else.

Dumb asses are those who allow dumb asses to get elected, and there sure are a lot of dumb asses in office these days. Prepare to kiss some asses in the near future if you want to save your you know what.*

* Even though one party may have chosen to be represented by an ass, asses and dumb asses in this context refers specifically to people of all parties who have chosen to be a real ass and dumb ass. They are easy to distinguish as they smell, are stubborn as a mule and appearing to be brainless when they speak.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 3:47pm

lol, who's dumber? You can tell by his grammar that he isn't an American, thus cannot be a Republican. Probably just a guy that can see the signs of what the EU has become and see that our US elected officials look to enslave us in the same garbage.

No matter where you stand -- republican or democrat -- you should be able to add two and two together to see that the end result is socialistic, just like the EU.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 9:29am

How can you tell he's not American by his grammar? (I'm not questioning this statement, I'm not an English native speaker and this simply made me curious. Thanks in advance for explaining...)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 7:15am

Quote:
"The EU preparing to pass new laws that will limit the maximum volume of..."

Could they prepare a law to shut them up so we don't have to turn the volume up so loud.?

FACIST, SOCIALIST, COMMUNIST, BIG BROTHER, CONTROL FREAK, ELITIST BIGOTS, What about the Hearing Impaired? YOU DISCRIMINATING BLOODY B....... they will not be able to hear it. This is forcible CLASSISM AGAINST THE HEARING IMPAIRED. TWO, it is a Crime against Animal Rights, as my Fish love it when I turn the iPod all the way up and drop the ear buds in the Bowl. Stop with the insanity. Fish (and other animals) have rights too!

I'd write more, but who reads these anyway? If you don't like the laws, change the law makers. It's that simple.

Apple change the law makers max volume to one notch above Zero. When they need help, tell them it operates within spec for them.

If you wear your iPod while MOWING THE LAWN or being in a noise environment, do not do it without some protection from said outside noise. You are only asking for trouble as you exasperate the issue out of control, which is why these lawmakers are proposing said bill, to save money on their SOCIALIZED MANDATED HEALTH CARE, which you all love, but will not need soon, because you have been protected from said self. Said enough. ;) =^P

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 9:03am

yeah, a few years from now and the EU will pass a law which forbids having sex... you may get HIV out of it!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 9:04am

yeah, a few years from now and the EU will pass a law which forbids having sex... you may get HIV out of it!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 5:29am

So let me get this straight: this action is prompted by research showing permanent hearing loss if one listens, with headphones, at a high volume, DAILY, FOR FIVE YEARS STRAIGHT?!

Once again bad science, in the hands of bad legislators, equals bad laws.

Marcello (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 5:35am

Hey let's get rid off those Big Babysitters we don't need em! revolution!!!!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 9:44am

Portable music players have been with us for like 30 years now, how many people does any of you know whose hearing was damaged by using headphones. Anyone? I don't mean some anecdotal case [citation needed], I mean someone you know, or at least someone known by someone you know.

Personally, I've never had any hearing problems due to exposure to loud music... although I managed to injure myself several times in my life in martial arts practice (including an eye socket injury). Should martial arts get banned in the EU?

These sort of regulations is not meant to protect anybody's health, at least not in the first place: the broad goal in my opinion is to condition people into thinking they couldn't live without bureaucracy taking care of them

Thus the world has to be consistently depicted as SCARY, full of dangers, health hazards etc.; or else somebody might ask - quite why do we have to feed this ever-growing bureaucratic parasite, what does it really do for us.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 27, 2009 - 11:04am

I sincerely doubt that we are achieving higher rates of hearing disabilities do to personal recording devices. In previous years, people did not wear ear protection in many manufacturing plants, military service or even police and fire fighters with the old over the head sirens. If anything, it is from TV commercials which broadcast at a much higher volume to ensure that they have our attention. Quit making choices for me. Allow the Darwin theory of survival of the fittest weed out those nincompoops!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2009 - 7:06am

Are these idiots not aware that the problem lies in the way music is mastered, and the frequencies most prevalent, rather than in the SPL capability of the player?

RE Electronic music causing more damage than (for example) rock, this isn't necessarily true. The ear is far more sensitive to high frequencies than lower frequencies (resulting in the A-weighting measurement seen on many data sheets). Rock music often contains large amounts of sound at 1kHz - 6kHz, which is the frequency where overdriven guitars get all their 'bite'. This is where the ear becomes very sensitive to damage. As it happens, this is the frequency where many earbuds become incredibly efficient (read: louder) in comparison to other frequencies, making the problem even worse.

Electronic music tends to be more bass heavy, and further to this, often more dynamic. By compressing the hell out of recordings, the ear has no time to recover (the same goes for speakers) and is far more likely to be damaged.

To get to the point, it's the recordings which are the problem. All that's going to happen is record labels (and clueless artists to an extent) are going to try and push more and more volume out of their records to make their music stand out on increasingly quiet MP3 players.

If the EU really wanted to do something meaningful, they'd impose limits on the dB-FS/peak dB ratio (which is a measurement of the amount compression on a recording), which means I'd be able to listen to good recordings on my iPod, and not just the shitty, flat, compressed, painful recordings which fill up most iPods...

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 01, 2009 - 7:07am

Are these idiots not aware that the problem lies in the way music is mastered, and the frequencies most prevalent, rather than in the SPL capability of the player?

RE Electronic music causing more damage than (for example) rock, this isn't necessarily true. The ear is far more sensitive to high frequencies than lower frequencies (resulting in the A-weighting measurement seen on many data sheets). Rock music often contains large amounts of sound at 1kHz - 6kHz, which is the frequency where overdriven guitars get all their 'bite'. This is where the ear becomes very sensitive to damage. As it happens, this is the frequency where many earbuds become incredibly efficient (read: louder) in comparison to other frequencies, making the problem even worse.

Electronic music tends to be more bass heavy, and further to this, often more dynamic. By compressing the hell out of recordings, the ear has no time to recover (the same goes for speakers) and is far more likely to be damaged.

To get to the point, it's the recordings which are the problem. All that's going to happen is record labels (and clueless artists to an extent) are going to try and push more and more volume out of their records to make their music stand out on increasingly quiet MP3 players.

If the EU really wanted to do something meaningful, they'd impose limits on the dB-FS/peak dB ratio (which is a measurement of the amount compression on a recording), which means I'd be able to listen to good recordings on my iPod, and not just the shitty, flat, compressed, painful recordings which fill up most iPods...