• NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    6 months ago

    about 12 decibels, which all but removes them, making them 94% quieter.

    This “conversion” from decibel to per cent is more than ridiculous.

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Why? dB is logarithmic so it’s difficult for people to picture how loud something is, if that’s the only number given.

    • A_A@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Well, 93.7% to be more exact. Did you recalculate it yourself the same i did ?

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

        You omitted the most important data, it’s 2db overall, not 12db.

        So your own “recalculation” isn’t even in the right ballpark as the correct answer.

        Its people that misinterpret the information and perpetuate it like you are doing here that makes these look far better than they actually are.

      • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Your calculation was about energy. But the calculation of energy is next to useless when you are trying to compare two different noises. You need to care about perception.

        The perception of noise is quite complicated. But as a rule of thumb: when some noise changes by -10dB, then you hear it about “half as loud”.

        Source: I have a university degree in acoustics.

        So for the reduction of -12dB here, it will be perceived as “nearly half as loud”. Very different than the “94%” is suggesting.

        • A_A@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          We agree that the -12dB is what’s important for human hearing … Now, you may agree that the 94% reduction is what counts regarding engineering // fabrication // design.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            We agree that the -12dB is what’s important for human hearing … Now, you may agree that the 94% reduction is what counts regarding engineering // fabrication // design.

            -2db* and 37%*

            Why are you perpetuating the wrong information?

            • hangonasecond@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              The snippet quoted in the original comments and referenced in subsequent comments refers specifically to the decibel reduction of the frequencies being targeted by the invention, not the volume of the overall sound.

              • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Is it? Because the next sentence in the paragraph (and the only sentence missing in the quote) is the overall sound reduction. Which is far more important and far less misleading than saying 12db and 94% quieter.

                Its intentionally misleading to deceive people, and than the general public incorrectly defends it, this is you.