Comments on Profile Post by Lyander

It depends on what you really try to measure and in what contexts.. Note any calibration is easily reversible in either direction.

@Vtory true, I was trying to measure my average listening levels is all. Noticed that the number jumped up significantly from the last time I did which is when I realised I had raw mic cal file loaded in, so there's more sensitivity to upper mids.

1) "raw comp" may not actually be raw as minidsp's head-comp curve quite deviates from general hrtf curves.
2) ear resos (concha, canal, drum) extensibly increases results
3) for noise level in general, we typically gauge loudness at the measuring point. I believe listening level should be consistent. This means we have to de-hrtf.

So overall I'd recommend against using raw calibration.

Thank you, yeah this means I'm not near ear death yet haha. I do tend to crank volumes when I want to sink into a specific album but I was hoping I wasn't quite reaching 90dBA peaks, even if only for a few minutes total.

It's also good to note listening noise loud may not equal to loud music signal. I remember seeing several studies indicating so. I think it makes sense. Rock concerts may be very loud (well above 110db often) but hearing loss is far more frequently reported among constantly noisy environment workers (mostly <110) than among concert enthusiasts.

That's true, I vaguely remember that being mentioned on here I think. I keep my exposure to anything notably loud at a minimum as best I can but for better(?) and for worse I just live in a noisy area. Bites.