The Truth About Silencer Volume Levels [VIDEO]

67
Previous Post
Next Post
suppressor silencer
Jeremy S for TTAG

If you’ve ever seen a silenced firearm in a movie or a TV show or heard an anti-gun politician talk on the subject, but haven’t heard a suppressed gunshot in person, you likely have a distorted idea of just how quiet (or not) they truly are. In this video — and a big thanks to Silencer Shop for helping us film and edit it! — we provide the facts on silencer volume level:

Watch the video embedded above, or click HERE to view it on Rumble. Visit Silencer Shop for the best prices and the easiest, most streamlined suppressor buying process in the country.

By the way, we’ll be launching a “studio” video like this one every Monday afternoon and a range video (like last week’s Sentry 12 shotgun review) every Thursday afternoon. Subscribe on Rumble to see ’em before their associated TTAG articles go live.

 

Previous Post
Next Post

67 COMMENTS

  1. Ok, this was a very good video except for one little thing. You kept looking at the lap top, and that reminded me of those actors that don’t know the lines and keep looking at cue cards.

    But overall good and very informative. A great video to show those who think a “silencer” means gun owners can magically sneak up on them in some sort of stealth mode.

    • Yeah, my notes on dB levels for all those random things were on there. I need a teleprompter LOL. Next time we film I’ll at least do a big cue card behind the camera or something for stats or other info I might need to reference (the time to actually practice and memorize it like an actor would for script lines doesn’t exist right now). Sorry if the laptop thing was distracting.

      • It didn’t bother me. If you’ve got a lot of data in front of you that’s not easy to memorize, just look at the screen so it’s accurate. People look at notes all the time when speaking. Who cares. You’re not doing a Shakespeare monologue.

      • IMO it was fine. Heck, if we as a community can live with Paul Harrell awkwardly turning back to the camera to tell us every. single. chrono reading we should be OK with a few glances at a laptop.

      • Instead of a teleprompter, just blather on and add some umms and uhhs in there and then sniff a small child – it works for our fearless leader

      • There used to be software for laptops that will do a controlled scroll like a teleprompter( just have it in your LOS but not in view of the camera. )

        Also please don’t reduce size of inserted videos or graphics with text in them. Hard to read on phones. Keep them the full dimension of your video.

        Otherwise good video and thx for using rumble and not that censorious fascist pootube.

    • Another thing I like about your video; Its not fluffed up with a bunch of distracting minutia and gets right to the point with facts. I like the way you did the various comparisons, straight forward and relatable each time on each point. Its all laid out very clearly, and its within the short attention span time exhibited by most anti-gun people who would get tons of truth from the video about “silencers”.

  2. I was waiting for actual soundtracks of the various items for a comparative observation. I’ve always known that guns are not silenced, but it would have been a great deal more instructive to hear those things (not counting the fact that my phone couldn’t reproduce the real sound, but, again, as a comparison).

    • I was waiting for the same thing. Of course, they can fire 200 different firearms on video, and you still won’t “get it”. Few people own speakers capable of recreating the sound, even if the microphones were good enough to capture it.

    • Wumingren and Paul,

      Readily available recording equipment will not accurately capture the sound levels that firearms produce, even with suppressors.

      Typical recording systems simply do not have enough dynamic range (for various reasons) to capture the loudest sounds and the softest sounds. Thus, one of three things will happen:
      1) The loudest sounds will be horribly distorted.
      2) The softest sounds will be totally missing.
      — or —
      3) The recording system will amplify the quiet sounds and reduce the loudest sounds so that everything is audible without distortion–but will not portray the actual sound level that was in the environment.

      The best that we can do is use relative verbal descriptions of the sound levels. And in that regard, I recently observed my cousin shooting an AR-15 platform pistol chambered in 9mm Luger with a 9-inch barrel and a nice suppressor. I was about 30 yards behind him while he was shooting away from me (of course) and the sound level was very intense and mildly painful without hearing protection where I stood–I am thinking that it would have caused hearing damage if I had been exposed to more than a few shots. (It was loud/painful enough that I promptly put my hearing protection muffs back on when he started shooting.) Saying it another way, I would have thought that he was shooting without a suppressor if I had not known better.

      Contrast that (sound level with a suppressor) versus no suppressor which produces extremely awful and piercing volume that immediately causes short-term hearing loss (e.g. reduced hearing sensitivity and “ringing in your ears”).

      Caveat: my cousin was shooting 115 grain bullets which definitely should have left the barrel at supersonic velocities and would have caused a significantly loud supersonic “boom” (actually “supersonic crack” is a better description). The “supersonic crack” of the bullets likely created much more volume than the rapid expansion of the burning propellant in the barrel and suppressor–hence the huge incentive to use sub-sonic ammunition with suppressors.

  3. I’m not remotely interested in any silencers, suppressors, or hush puppies until their not regulated by the federal government.
    Besides I can make my own if I really want one.

  4. Umm, I thought you were going to discuss the internal volume of various silencers and how much effect that had on efficiency.

  5. It’s quite telling how many people think that silencers are illegal. It’s made up bs from the left. Just like ‘Hollywood silent’ basically is.

    Where silencers are concerned, it’s all about the NFA and states rights. Just like some states allow people to have and use weed even with a federal prohibition, some states refuse to allow their citizens access to silencers even though there is a perfectly legal process federally. It’s no different from places like California refusing 30 round magazines while other states allow them like buying candy bars.

    There are many misconceptions the Democrat left has created in peoples’ minds about this and other things.

    The hearing protection act could have been. But no! It’s better to make everyone suffer hearing loss.

  6. Back in the 70’s several friends of mine were collecting machine guns as the prices were very reasonable back in those days. My friend bought a Colt M16 for around $600 and ditto for a new Thompson .45 acp and for way less he bought a Sten and 3 Mac 10/11 guns in .380, 9mm and .45 acp.

    He also had a .22 conversation kit for another M16 he bought that had if I remember correctly had about a 11 inch barrel. He said he wanted to carry it under his coat. That really stunned me. This gun was so silent that the bolt made about as much noise at the cartridge when it went off. Any nut case firing into a crowd could have easily killed dozens of people and they would not have heard a thing.

    Even his 9mm Mac with sub sonic ammo was quiet enough that if you were say 50 to 100 yards away and firing across a street into a large crowd with the noise a crowd makes and the traffic noise again the people would not even know they were being fired upon.

    Shooting inside a house with a silencer will also reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.

    So in conclusion the video was mostly bullshit when it comes to silencers. Yes I agree they are not totally silent but they are quiet “enough” to commit murder or even mass murder with them so yes regulating them the way they do under the NFA presently was a damn good idea and it was lucky the Republican speaker of the House Ryan refused to even bring up for a vote the idiotic bill to let them be sold over the counter to every street punk and psycho that would have wanted one. And in no time at all the second hand market would have armed every dope peddling gang banger in the entire country. That that was a chilling thought.

    What is really chilling is that many times when I questioned people as to why they really wanted one most replied “In case I ever needed it”. None ever mentioned saving their hearing that is right wing bullshit from day one. Lets face facts you can wear a good set of plugs and muffs to do that and everyone knows it.

    • “Shooting inside a house with a silencer will also reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      Lots of things could happen with anything.

      smothering someone with a pillow “will also reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      beating someone with a bat, a good solid hit, can also “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      Drugging someone (the most favored means of suicide) can also “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      Pushing someone off a roof of a very tall building can also “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      Cutting someones throat with a knife can also “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      Strangling someone with your bare hands (which actually strangling someone to death with your bare hands is pretty difficult to do) can also “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      heck, running someone down with a car in a parking lot could can also “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door.”

      So you want to ban cutlery, hands, pillows, cars, bats, and any other method to can also “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door” too? Are you so stupid as to think that all legal gun owners get one with the only reason being to “reduce the noise level to the point that the neighbors would not realize people were being murdered next door” when legal gun owners are by numbers, fact, and integrity the most law abiding citizens in the country

      Seriously, WTF is wrong with you.

      • Obviously, we need a law banning the use of exhaust system mufflers on all motor vehicles currently in use in these United States. This will cut down on the number of people contemplating using their car or truck as nefarious , silent killing machines. Right, lil’ d ?

        • It’s dacian, so keep it simple… imagine you just got tired of driving around in your loud-ass car that mom lets you borrow. As a nice gesture, you price out fixing it for her, and discover you first have to undergo a background check ,for $200 ,to see if you’re worthy of buying that muffler, and can’t proceed with buying it ’till you’re approved. After waiting for months, you are APPROVED ( remember, this is imagined) and discover that your muffler isn’t the $100 cost that you were expecting, but $900. You say “fuck it “, and just decide to putup with the damage to your ears and the irritation to everyone around you – hey, your dacian, so you’ll just blame it on Capitolvanion far right wingers !

    • Go wear muffs while hunting. See how that works out for you. Most of us try not to disturb dear heards and sleeping individuals on thier well earned saturdays 2 miles away when taking a shot. Ruins another man’s set up. And all that bullshit you dribbled on your key board while your vagina leaked while espousing mindless leftist echo chamber talking points on criminal actions and suppressors….just proves why we gun owners laugh at you idiots who think you know what your talking about. You’re like the weather man predicting prostitution stock market gains . Stay in your lane and shut up.

      ….

    • I’ll bet you have no idea what fbi stats are on actual criminal homicides and what caliber is mostly used. And I’m willing to bet you dont know 2 brands of said caliber that already exist for that caliber that already functions as designed,quiet as an air rifle and completely available to all citizens already for years. Go back and dig your face some more in shannon watts roast beef curtain.

  7. Excellent video, thanks.

    Check out the dope above me. He says suppresors will let you fire into a crowd and nobody will know you were firing 😉

    He completely misses or ignores the real world example of a hunter trying to listen for game at the same time said hunter wants to protect his hearing. Those electronic hearing protection devices remove the ability to know where sound is coming from making them next to useless for those of us who stalk prey instead of camping in a blind.

    • I have some ear plugs that have valves in them. I bought them decades ago in1968. You can hear conversations and yes directions of sound easily. The valve in the plug closes when a loud noise goes off. My plugs were made by Lee-Sonic but down through the years other companies made similar valve plugs.

  8. Beyond 25 yards, there is little, if any, difference with or without a suppressor when using a supersonic round. There’s a video busting the “silenced” sniper myth.

      • Subsonic rounds can be pretty darned quiet – especially .22 LR
        I’ve witnessed some suppressed guns where the action is louder than the bang.

        • I never saw the sense in getting a “suppressor” to begin with. I understand it, I even have a couple for the novelty, but just to have one with the justification of hearing protection so you can shoot without hearing protection is lying to yourself and you don’t realize it. It costs usually hundreds of dollars and another few hundred for the tax stamp (in some cases you can buy a whole new gun for what a “suppressor” and tax stamp together cost) , and then ya gotta wait months, the sound you hear suppressed is not the only sound there is and you eventually still end up with damaged hearing anyway if you use it without other hearing protection at your ears and its not really true overall that a “suppressor” protects your hearing, and the manufacturers don’t seem to realize they have not bent the laws of physics to their will and the laws of physics still apply for the creation they claim will protect your hearing but doesn’t actually because it can’t violate the laws of physics.

          A whole industry built on the perception of one sound being louder or not as loud as another sound with the variable idea projection that some way or another the laws of physics do not apply when a “suppressor” is attached to a firearm.

          A set of suitable hearing protection can be had for less than $100.00 (average being about $40.00), you can get them quickly (today at the store or in a few days ordered on line), no additional cost of a tax stamp, no regulation, and they actually protect your hearing.

  9. The most accurate term for them (that also doesn’t draw unwarranted negative reaction) is what I use- a muffler. And since the general public hates cars without mufflers, we should treat firearms just the same- right?

    Exactly.

  10. Total crap analysis.

    Sound pressure levels are always measured at a specific distance.

    A .50 BMG measured at 1,000 meters has nothing at all to do with hearing safety at the operator’s ears.

    “A helicopter”… “A jetliner”… “A police siren”… “A jackhammer”…

    Dude. Seriously. None of those provide any meaningful reference.

    If you want to measure silencers, measure them AT THE OPERATOR’S EARS. Else, you’re just blowing smoke and repeating something you read on the internet to gain your own clicks.

    • It seems as if some commenters think this video was suppose to be a presentation of “suppressor” effectiveness. It is not a presentation of “suppressor” effectiveness. All of the video is basically standard lab and industry practice presented well in the context of “suppressors”

      The comparisons to “A helicopter”… “A jetliner”… “A police siren”… “A jackhammer”… are correct.

      These provide the reference for the underlying premise of the video in relation to sound pressure, not sound frequency or “suppressor” effectiveness. The relation is sound pressure which is also measured with a DB unit of measure.

      Sound pressure comparisons are not measured “AT THE OPERATOR’S EARS”, they are measured at a range of three to six feet from (in this case) the operator. The reason for this is because at a range of three to six feet if the sound pressure is damaging it will begin to damage hearing 100% of the time, and also three to six feet is where human hearing is suppose to be sharpest naturally.

      the references to “A helicopter”… “A jetliner”… “A police siren”… “A jackhammer” are common for use in comparing sound pressures of those sounds pressures that happen within a range of three to six feet from (in this case) the operator when that sound pressure arrives at that threshold measuring point. The DB ratings for those given are from the average of those sounds as the pressure is at that three to six foot range from the measurement reference point and not at their origination point or at the “operator”. This is common lab practice when measuring sound pressure comparisons. The weapon is closer, and because its closer there is less attenuation of peak impulse before the sound in open air of the weapon firing reaches the “operator”.

      Due to this less open air attenuation factor the sound from a suppressed weapon firing has a sound pressure relation to those sounds mentioned in comparison that is ~equal in comparison relatively to those on average.

      The reason “suppressed” sounds quieter than those comparisons or firing without a “suppressor” compared to those, to the “operator” is based in a few different things. First, the “suppressor” has attenuated the peaks of the impulse sound pressure of the weapon firing (the bullet), but the comparison sounds still have the peak impulse sound pressure not attenuated. Second, “suppressors” (correctly designed and manufactured) cover the human hearing frequency range, mostly, for attenuation where as the comparison sounds have all the frequency ranges that are not attenuated. Overall, these two things acting together, we refer to this as “suppression”, as in sound “suppressors” for weapons – in other words, attenuation of one sound source peak impulse compared to attenuation of another sound source peak impulse (e.g. also known commonly as firing with a suppressor vs firing without a suppressor). This is how “suppressors” are rated, the attenuation of the “suppressor” for peak impulse sound pressure in open air compared to a reference sound pressure in open air, thus the measurement units in DB as DB, for sound in open air, is a measure of sound pressure. But although there seems to be a perceived difference between “suppressed” and the comparison sounds, the overall sound pressures in the frequency ranges are still ~equal in comparison relatively to those on average at their respective ranges (e.g. weapon fired at operator or from the others at three to six feet).

      The video is correct for its context and content. The information the “Silencer Shop” gave jeremy for this video is based on standard lab and sound device industry practice.

      • note additional clarification:

        there is a lot of sound pressure energy from a bullet being fired, a broad spectrum of sound pressures in frequencies in and out of normal human hearing range. A “suppressor” does not attenuate all the sound pressure energy, it only, basically, takes the peaks off the sound pressure impulse energy for, mostly, that in the normal human hearing frequency range. Removing those peaks is why a suppressed weapon sounds quieter than a non-suppressed weapon, to the weapon operator and its what leads to the perception of a suppressor as a safety device that helps with ear damage prevention.

        There is a lot of sound pressure energy left over after a “suppressor” does its job, this can and still does damage hearing to some extent and some of it is in frequency ranges you can not hear.

        The damage may not be immediately noticeable. It may be a tiny incremental amount over time, it may be something so subtle you don’t even notice it, the effects may not be noticed until years later – but it is 100% fact that although in the peak noise area a suppressor may help against hearing damage to some extent, over all there is nothing inherent in operation of a suppressor that prevents all hearing damage because there is simply too much sound pressure energy that a suppressor can not attenuate and repeatedly over time subjecting your hearing to it will cause damage to hearing to some extent. Contrary to what people think or manufacturers imply in their sales materials – there is no such thing as a weapon suppressor that prevents all hearing damage.

        Suppressors are neat, they are fun to use. But they do not prevent all hearing damage like people want to think, even if you use a suppressor wear hearing protection on your ears.

        • “… its what leads to the perception of a suppressor as a safety device that helps with ear damage prevention.”

          should have been

          “… its what leads to the perception of a suppressor as a safety device that helps with hearing damage prevention.”

        • The average “suppression” provided by a “suppressor” of good quality designed properly from reputable and knowledgeable manufacturer is max – ~30 DB compared to a 160 DB standard. This is a sound device industry standard thing.

          160 DB – 30 DB = 130 DB …. permanent hearing damage can start around ~80 DB.

          But lets be a little unrealistically generous here and say its a max of – ~50 DB for a “suppressor”

          160 DB – 50 DB = 110 db …. permanent hearing damage can start around ~80 DB.

          140 dB peak sound pressure level (dBP) is the maximum one-time exposure level for impulse noise (e.g. weapons fire) that the average human hearing can tolerate before permanent hearing damage. That’s a single short exposure in your entire life time.

          After ~30 minutes of cumulative exposure to “suppressed” sound of the average weapon sound “supressor” you have …. permanent hearing damage even if you do not notice it unless you also were wearing good hearing protection at your ears.

          When accounting for sound pressure energy (sound pressure level (dBP)) in frequencies outside human hearing frequency range which are also present in weapons fire “suppressed” or not, the average “suppressor” for a 5.56 rifle still allows greater than ~100 DB peak of sound to escape not attenuated.

          There is no such thing as a weapon “suppressor” that attenuates enough to stop hearing damage.

          wear hearing protection.

  11. Tell me you guys didn’t just publish a video about the sound of silencers without EVER including audio from suppressed guns being fired. Seriously?

    • Its not needed. Its talking abut comparative values already known for “silence”. Its not necessary to fire a suppressor to talk about those.

  12. I have two suppressors, a 5.56 and a 30 caliber, Form 1.
    As long as I use subsonic ammo, they are quiet, actually “Hollywood” quiet.
    I do not need hearing protection, the bolt chambering the next round is louder than the gunshot.
    Supersonic ammo is another thing completely. While suppressed 5.56 is still hearing safe, any of my 30 caliber rifles require hearing protection.

  13. Another thing, you can’t tell how quiet a suppressor actually is if you’re recording with your phone or even a camera, the audio is limited to about 96 db by the electronics.
    I’ve tried with tablets and my phone with db apps and that is as high as it will register.
    The only way to measure the db level is with the B&K Sound Level Meter.

  14. Even with subsonic ammo, my 300 BO ARs are not near hollywood quiet even with a JP silent spring. Too much action noise. However the action on my 22 pistol is quiet enough, that most people would call it hollywood quiet. My brother also has a 38/357 lever action with a threaded barrel. That thing is hollywood quiet with 38 spl. The sound of the bullet hitting dirt is as loud as the shot itself. Really fun to shoot. Throw a 357 in there and it’s a whole different story, but still fun.

  15. The word “Silencer” is one I believe should be dropped from the lexucin of Firearm related terms. It’s completely inaccurate and it’s continued use is detrimental to the Firearm Community and the General Public’s opinions,, attitudes and acceptance.
    Suppressors inclusion in the NFA Act was done due to lies, ignorance and misconceptions about what sound mitigation/suppression really accomplishes.
    As someone who suffers from significant hearing loss due to repeated high volume exposure over a lifetime of exposure, I’d love to own suppressors for every Firearm I own that’s capable of using one. Anything that reduces my risk of further damage is prudent, I refuse to pay a $200 Tax, which is a blatant INFRINGEMENT on the 2nd Ammendment by a government barred from infringing upon that right. In fact the entire NFA is Unconstitutional, and the results to address a problem that same government stupidly created in the first place.

    As far as I’m concerned, quit using the word Silencer, it’s continued use even within the industry just contributes to the confusion, misconceptions and lies about what Suppressors are capable of limiting.

    • I believe it is there because the original inventor literally called it as such – the original patent is for a ‘gun silencer’ as I recall. The ‘suppressor’ term was adopted decades later as a more accurate term. But the ATF will still use the original IRS documentation on them, unfortunately.

      I just find it funny that in the UK gun ownership is rare and controlled to almost idiotic point – but owning a suppressor for your guns is basically a given.

  16. If you want to know the how and why of silencers watch “Silencer Student” on YouTube, real world testing and explanation. Dude spent thousands on a dbl meter, he does mostly form 1 stuff but does do commercial stuff too. The main thing is it’s a real world education on silencers.

    • “The main thing is it’s a real world education on silencers.”

      No it isn’t. “it’s a real world education on” the perception of “silencers”.

      Carefully watch how he does his measurement. Basically, he fires then takes a measurement from the DB meter. Whats missing from that measurement? The reference for each measurement he takes, that’s whats missing. He didn’t need an expensive DB meter to do that, you can do that with any cheap DB meter. He doesn’t know how to use his own meter for a valid measurement. You can’t evaluate a “suppressor” attenuation in the real world unless you do its attenuation measurement against a standard of known level, but his numbers are just what ever the peak of the meter shows and they even vary from reading to reading under the same conditions which is a big clue something is not right.

      For example, in one video, he fires and then references the meter reading at 25 DB and then fires again, same weapon same suppressor same distance firing sub-sonic ammo, under the same conditions and references the meter and says its 125 DB. Huh? Permanent hearing damage starts at ~ 80 DB. Then he goes on and each reading is different, but the perceived volume is about the same. Perceived volume is not the same as actual peak of all frequencies of sound, which is why his meter readings keep changing for the same conditions. Congratulations “Silencer Student”, you just proved that firing with a “suppressor” can cause hearing damage and doesn’t actually protect hearing.

      Just sounding more quiet and then assigning a value to to it from an expensive DB meter is not a standard nor is it a valid measurement nor is it an indication of not damaging hearing nor is it an indication of “suppressor” effectiveness/efficiency. The real world evaluation of a “suppressor” attenuation is always evaluated against a standard of known level and they do that for a reason, its because just saying some number on the meter doesn’t mean anything in terms of attenuation. Then, like all the manufacturers, he does not account for sound pressure peak impulse levels of sound frequencies outside the hearing frequency range which overall can also cause hearing damage as much as the not “suppressed” sound you can hear in frequencies in the human hearing range.

      He may not notice it yet, but with firing as many suppressors as he does without any hearing protection he has for a 100% fact damaged his hearing at some level. Later in life that damage will come back to haunt him in the form of degrading hearing to some degree as the damage degrades further from age.

      No, “Silencer Student” is not presenting a “real world education on silencers.”

      • That’s far and away the best and most helpful comment I’ve ever seen you make. TTAG once had a much greater variety of readers, i.m.h.o., and they, along with Dyspeptic Gunsmith, have left because the purpose of the website has changed to fear and bile.
        I don’t honestly know enough about dB meter use to say I agree with you technically, but you seem to have done your homework, and your comments about hearing loss at low levels of sound should have been one of the first things in the video, even though the host tried very hard. Well done. You’ve earned my respect thoroughly with this helpful comment, your user name notwithstanding.

  17. IMPORTANT FLAW THAT COULD ROB YOU OF YOUR HEARING IN THIS VID

    140dB is the level that makes you lose hearing acuity when it hits your ears ONE TIME.
    You will absolutely, positively lose hearing at lower levels of loud noise when you hear them more than one time,

    85 decibels of noise will cause permanent loss of hearing when you hear in in one workday.

    You can make your own decisions based on these ranges, but if you don’t want to end up understanding one out of every four words in instrumented testing like me, you’ll have to protect your hearing FAR below 140dB.
    My audiologist says he sees so many shooters with severe hearing loss, he can’t count them.
    He tells the few shooters who don’t have severe hearing loss that they should shoot more often…lots more often…and for less time. He believes that 10 shots from a loud gun with the best hearing protection is the most that anyone can take in one session without permanent hearing loss.
    Then he says nature doesn’t care that that’s terribly inconvenient.

  18. Shooters must understand HOW gunshots make them lose hearing. It doesn’t happen right away. It damages the auditory cells’ regrowth ability, esp. the “hairs” in the inner ear.
    Then, with each passing year, they grow back shorter, until they’re like stubble grass, not tall grass that waves in the wind. Then they don’t stimulate the nerves that go from your inner ear to the brain as much because they don’t wave as much.
    That’s the reason.

      • Yes; the “hairs” look just like blown-down tall grass after a windstorm because both of them were literally blown down.

        You can actually find… though it does take a bit of looking…images of post-blast, blown-down “hairs” if you do an image search on the net.
        Unfortunately, the images were taken during autopsies of people who’d died as a result of them blasts, but, well, they are the real thing…

        • That leaves me wondering if there has ever been any research done on hearing protection in the form of a “gel” that could be injected into the ear to serve as a physical buffer to keep the cilia from suffering “whiplash” from the shockwaves- a cilia “cushion”, if you will.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here