On 7/8/2005 5:30 PM, Stan Gosnell wrote the following:
Mitty wrote in
:


On 7/8/2005 1:46 AM, Roger wrote the following:

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 18:00:53 -0400, Luke Scharf

Flying small prop planes I would not want anything that did not have
full ear coverage like the passive, but with ANR added.


You like hot & sweaty ears?


I like having hearing protection, especially for high-frequency stuff
which ANR doesn't protect against, when (not if) the ANR portion fails.
I, too, won't even consider a headset that doesn't have good passive
protection. It's your hearing, though, so use what you want.


I'm not quite sure why this has gotten to be such an extended discussion, but
I'm also not sure of your point. The Clarity set has exactly what you want --
high attenuation especially in the higher frequencies. Check page 17 of their
owner manual: http://clarityaloft.com/6_ClarityAloft_OwnersGd.pdf

So if your point is that you need big muffs to get good attenuation, that is
incorrect. (In fact, logic would lead me to conclude that a good seal in the
ear canal is easier to make than a large one encompassing hair, glasses bows,
irregular head shape, etc.)

Whether the LightSpeed set also has high attenuation, I don't know. My friend
who is the president of Clarity tells me that their performance is due to the
unique ear tip design and materials, which are covered by several patents. But
then he's the chief salesman, too. :-) What I do know is that the product
works far better than the Softcomm ANR sets that I have and that I did not
hesitate to write the big check after flying with them on a demo.