europa-list
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Europa-List: anr headsets

Subject: Re: Europa-List: anr headsets
From: Carl Pattinson <carl@flyers.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:07:25

ANR Headsets

A word of warning on the use of ANR headsets. If your intercom setup dosent 
include squelch on the mic circuit it can make the best headsets appear 
worse than useless. Our intercom was built into the ICOM A2000 radio and 
these do not have any microphone squelch.

We initially used a set of cheapo "Skyforce" ANR headsets and to be honest 
they werent up to much (or so we thought).

So we upgraded to a middle of the range Sennheiser HMEC300 and there was 
little or no improvement - that is till we realised the mics were picking up 
the cockpit noise and feeding it back through the intercom. We have now 
fitted a separate (portable) intercom with separate squelch control and the 
reduction in noise levels is considerable.

If you arent sure if the mics are feeding excessive noise into the amplifier 
circuit try muffling them with a towel and seeing what difference this makes 
to incoming transmissions (or simply to the ambient noise in the headsets) - 
in flight of course.

Im not saying dont buy ANR as I would opt for them every time. Given the 
choice I would have opted for the BOSE ones it was a hell of a job 
persuading Mrs P that 350 (each) was worth spending never mind 600 !!!

Carl Pattinson
G-LABS

BTW - IMHO noise cancelling microphones dont seem to cancel out very much 
noise - maybe someone with a superior technical understanding might 
volunteer an explanation.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William Harrison" <willie.harrison@tinyonline.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: anr headsets


> <willie.harrison@tinyonline.co.uk>
>
> Hello Jos
>
> I have used three types of anr.  My experience is that you get what  you 
> pay for. I used a cheapo "Pilot" set for several years. They were  OK, 
> they worked reasonably well but they were not robust: the strain  relief 
> on the cable was inadequate and a solder joint failed at an 
> "inconvenient" time; also, one of the jack plugs fractured when it  took a 
> small knock. I also used an ebay bargain second hand Peltor  set which I 
> believe was only marketed in the US. That was rubbish on  active noise 
> reduction although like all Peltors it has good passive  noise reduction 
> and is very tough. I decided to stop messing around,  and so I bought a 
> Bose set 2 years ago. Astonishingly expensive but  the best of the three 
> I've used. The passive nr on it is minimal but  the active nr is terrific. 
> Fortunately, my wife never saw the invoice...
>
> One other thought. I have some special earphones for use on a  motorbike 
> (iPod, satnav etc). These are moulded to the shape of the  individual 
> customer's ear so they allow almost zero ambient noise in  and therefore 
> enable you to hear with the sound volume at quite a low  level. The 
> supplier (Ultimate Hearing) told me they could make a set  if I wanted 
> with the right impedence and the right jack plug to work  in an aircraft - 
> it might make a useful experiment although it would  need an additional 
> mike, of course.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Willie
>
>
> On 27 Jul 2007, at 16:16, josok wrote:
>
>>
>> If there is still somebody around and not redoing tail planes or 
>> visiting Oshkosh:
>>
>> While i have a pair of very well rated David Clark headsets, my  test 
>> pilot suggested that ANR would be better. I tend to agree,  because these 
>> passive sets are probably tuned to reduce the noise  of Lycosauruses and 
>> the like. So, if you have experienced the one  and the other, what's your 
>> opinion? I know already which is the  most expensive one. They have an 
>> offer for CFI's, which they no  doubt charge back on the end user. Don't 
>> have to say that i hate  that kind of "marketing" Smells of a bribe. So 
>> is there a good,  less expensive alternative?
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Jos Okhuijsen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> 



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>