Electronic Hearing Protection Headset Recommendation

[Philip]

Electronic earmuffs such as Peltor use microphones to pick up ambient sound and, according to the user's adjustment on the volume control, amplify the sound to the desired level. When the volume control is turned to OFF, they function exactly like any other regular earmuffs by passively attenuating noise.

It is most useful in situations where two shooters want to talk ( e.g. coach and shooter ) on line when others are firing away nearby. The electronics allow talking to come through but will cut down within milliseconds when a high level impulsive noise such as a gun shot is detected. Electronic earmuffs do not necessarily give you better hearing protection.

Personally I do not prefer to use this kind of device, as others here pointed out, due to potential distraction. I really don't need to hear what others have to say when I am shooting, especially competing. The coaching situation as state above is most likely the only time I would find it useful. But this is of course personal choice.

Because of the microphones, it can potentially be interpreted as a "receiving device", because this is exactly what they do: to receive ambient sound and then amplify and output it as audio signal. Receiving signal does not need to be via electronic means ( such as wireless communication by walkie-talkies...etc. ), it could also be in physical means ( such as sound waves ). Once again this is open to interpretation.

That is why shooters like R.M. who has been to world level competitions, or other shooters who have been to higher levels of competitions, had actually experienced or witnessed RO's approaching shooters with such devices for checking. I personally have seen this happened at the Canadian National Pistol Championships a few years ago. The end results was that the shooter was allowed to use the earmuffs, without the batteries, for the match, after the shooter's explanation and the OR's inspection. I just know for myself I would not want to be in his shoes.

I think the bottomline here is no one should intentionally invite RO's attention at a high level match, even if you truly believe your interpretation of the rules are more correct than that of the RO's.

Back to 3D's questions, a few of Peltor's earmuffs have liquid/foam ear-cushions and are quite comfortable. They even have a gel-filled ear-cushion for optimal comfort, but expensive. Maybe others on this board can evaluate on other brand names.

[Len_R]

Talked to a range officer today for an USAS PTO, said they were specifically not allowed as they are receivers and enhancers of ambient noise.

But more to the point, the "supposed" misunderstanding of the rule must be world wide as every time I've asked someone who should know, they all say not allowed. Soooo we have a debate here but to date three people "in charge" of PTO's and a MFG say they are not allowed...what is the logical answer...they are not allowed.

I guess the other issue is, the first quote coming from N.B about the peltor came from a peltor site, so if the manufacturer feels they are no good for competition, then what's left to say.

"It started in 1997 and has carried through. Or are you saying that in 2004 the rule has been changed? Please show us the rule change that allows for it."

No, the rule has not changed, but for most people the misinterpretation of it has.

[Spencer C]

Sigh

maybe some people don't need hear hearing protection - they won't hear...

[Len_R]

Again if the people running the match say no, then what is the issue? I guess where is it that you are the authority? Should one say Spencer C on the Internet told me it's OK, so NCAA and USAS judge you are wrong?
It's unfortunate that some people don't listen to the fact that USAS judges are saying no, and that's what we are living with at least by me.
What judge or offical would be the needed offical to make this a firm answer?


As a side note, I use "normal" hearning protectors as I have found the electronic ones more distracting than a good 25+ db reduction.

Sigh

maybe some people don't need hear hearing protection - they won't hear...

[TomF]

Sounds like judicial activism. Maybe there could be a protest and ISSF could make a ruling on the definition and clarify the rule.

LOL!

If I ever entered a match that I didnt care about, which aint gonna happen, I will do it. Otherwise somebody I guess can ask for a clarification of the rule.

All the rule has to say is hearing protectors with electronic circuitry is forbidden! Otherwise if words mean something, then electronic noise reduction hearing protectors are legal because they are not receivers. If they are then everyone please remove your hearing aid before stepping up to the line.

LOL!

[Spencer C]

Incidentally, I am an ISSF Judge A in Rifle, Pistol, Target Control & Electronic Target Control, with a fair number of Olympics, Paralympics, World Cups and Regional Championships under my belt

Again if the people running the match say no, then what is the issue? I guess where is it that you are the authority? Should one say Spencer C on the Internet told me it's OK, so NCAA and USAS judge you are wrong?
It's unfortunate that some people don't listen to the fact that USAS judges are saying no, and that's what we are living with at least by me.
What judge or offical would be the needed offical to make this a firm answer?


As a side note, I use "normal" hearning protectors as I have found the electronic ones more distracting than a good 25+ db reduction.

Sigh

maybe some people don't need hear hearing protection - they won't hear...

[David Levene]

Incidentally, I am an ISSF Judge A in Rifle, Pistol, Target Control & Electronic Target Control, with a fair number of Olympics, Paralympics, World Cups and Regional Championships under my belt

And, from what I have personally witnessed, one who applies the rules rigourously.

I have also spoken to other ISSF Judges, all agreed that they are OK.

[Len_R]

Well then there is a significant divergence in judging in the ISSF as some of your peers seem to think it's not OK. So again we are at an impass as the ISSF rules I live under seem to be different than the ones you seem to enforce, or don't enforce.

Incidentally, I am an ISSF Judge A in Rifle, Pistol, Target Control & Electronic Target Control, with a fair number of Olympics, Paralympics, World Cups and Regional Championships under my belt

And, from what I have personally witnessed, one who applies the rules rigourously.

I have also spoken to other ISSF Judges, all agreed that they are OK.

[Claudio]

I shoot both air and free pistol. I really like the low frequency attenuation that the my Ultimate 10's give over the fold-up style Shotgunner especially when I'm trying to concentrate shooting free pistol at the local range along with a crowd of large bore boomers.

I shoot air and free as well, sometimes I practice free pistol indoors or out doors along other bigger caliber guns. The best choice for me was a good in your ear protector as well a good over the ear protector. Sometimes I use one or the other or both depending on the discipline and what is happening around me.

Instead of buying a fancy electronic one, buy the best of the two that I mentioned, it would be a lot better for you. I have a pair of electronic ones and here are the disadvantages.
They cost more than two of my other pairs.
They are too distracting, as they pick up too much around you, when you want to concentrate the most.
If you like them a lot and take them to a match, you don't need or take the chance of extra attention from a range official. Whether they are legal or not, you don't need that kind of distraction. It happened to me.

I like wearing my two pairs, it does the job for those big noises and I don't hear all the other things around me. In case your are wondering, I can still hear the loud sounds a of range official.

[3d]

I didn't realize that the posting was moved and still up since I noticed it was deleted from the pistol board. My appolgies for not responding since. I already ordered a replacement hygine kit for the Ultimate 10, but I'm still in the market for a better pair that I would really prefer to have a liquid-filled muff. I appreciate the suggestions. Just by coincidence today, I discovered a very tempting deal that maybe somebody here in the states might be interested in on a pair of electronic hearing protectors for under $25 USD. I don't know how good these are as compared to the peltor or other major brands. I'm going to post it under another heading.