Are OTB suppressors worth it?

[omicron1792]

No no no. Don’t you understand, 2dB at 130dB is OH MY GOD difference.

Humor or mocking are both signs of lost arguments.

 

[Formidilosus]

Humor or mocking are both signs of lost arguments.

It’s also a way to show the absurdity of positions or statements.

 

[Shortschaf]

Depending on the frequencies and time/decay, 127 dB can easily cause more hearing damage than 130 dB would.

Any real world example of this ocurring you can share?

I have never heard of any difference being reported in the sound frequency or decay between suppressors

 

[nm.otter]

Any real world example of this occurring you can share?

None so far.

I can sketch out a waveform that has more energy than another, and frequency response gets more complicated.

 

[Shortschaf]

None so far.

I can sketch out a waveform that has more energy than another, and frequency response gets more complicated.

So is it truth only in theory? Or is there somewhere I can read more about this phenomonon between these two suppressor signatures, one supposedly lower dBA but more harmful to hearing?

Not sure anyone is interested in a theoretical waveform sketch that may not even exist in this context.

If it only exists as an academic truth point, I dont see its usefullness. It would be technically correct in the same way as something like "if humans could run 50mph then they would be faster than horses"

 

[JGRaider]

None so far.

Shocker.

 

[Kaleb]

What a quiet world some people must live in. Going by some of these arguments everyone I know should be deaf.

 

[Shortschaf]

Lay two suppressors on the table that are identical in length, weight, durability, and price, but one is demonstrably quieter and Im choosing the quieter one every single time. Doesnt matter if its 1, 3, or 10dB

This is how I see suppressor shopping these days. We are drowning in SKU's to pick from. I don't understand what is hard to understand about that preference.

OTB obviously have length going for them, so when length is your primary concern, they take the cake and may or may not just cost you a couple ounces or dB. I have nothing bad to say about that preference some people have

 

[omicron1792]

What a quiet world some people must live in. Going by some of these arguments everyone I know should be deaf.

Silly

 

[atmat]

Some of y’all are wild. Once something is within a hearing safe range, 2-3 dB is truly nothing for the minimal exposure of a gunshot.

Would you still be having this “academic” debate if, in this hypothetical argument, one suppressor was 60 dB and another was 63 dB?

None of you would be freaking out about “double the energy” because they’re both in the safe hearing range.

 

[HuntHarder]

 

[omicron1792]

Some of y’all are wild. Once something is within a hearing safe range, 2-3 dB is truly nothing for the minimal exposure of a gunshot.

Would you still be having this “academic” debate if, in this hypothetical argument, one suppressor was 60 dB and another was 63 dB?

None of you would be freaking out about “double the energy” because they’re both in the safe hearing range.

Again. What is hearing safe range? That’s something you just made up on the spot.

As already posted. There is no suppressor, or hearing protection, or both, that bring supersonic gunfire into a hearing safe range over time.

 

[Shortschaf]

Oh wow all things the same you'd pick the quieter one? Lol yea me too but that has absolutely nothing to with my comment. I was referring to the endless post about 1-3db curves and OASHA. Wasn't singling you out unless you enjoy 96 posts about 1-3db and the aarp.

Sorry I misunderstood your comment's intent. Ill just edit it to not be in reply to you.

If it helps explain the context earlier, the hearing charts were brought up because of ridicule on folks just choosing the quieter cans

 

[Kaleb]

Sorry I misunderstood your comment's intent. Ill just edit it to not be in reply to you

no problem I deleted my sarcastic reply to you.

 

[atmat]

Again. What is hearing safe range? That’s something you just made up on the spot.

140 dB is the most cited and reported level for instant and permanent hearing loss resulting from impulse sounds. You know this, as it’s been stated here.

Once you’re safely under that, it’s a theoretical or academic argument — which doesn’t make a difference for the end user.

 

[omicron1792]

140 dB is the most cited and reported level for instant and permanent hearing loss resulting from impulse sounds. You know this, as it’s been stated here.

Once you’re safely under that, it’s a theoretical or academic argument — which doesn’t make a difference for the end user.

All I can say is you’re wrong.