The only possible better method of quantification is shooting the silencer yourself. To assist with these outlier cases, I sometimes publish in-depth comparisons for members to illustrate the different hearing response ranges, and why a certain silencer might sound similar to another if someone has high frequency hearing loss, for example.įor most users (95 percent), the Suppression Rating, alone, is the best real relative measure of sound signature. This doesn't mean it is less damaging to their ears, it just means they may be unable to make the subjective judgement call. This is outside the model parameters for the 95th-percentile inner ear. Some users may incur a different perceived hearing response due to hearing loss in certain parts of the spectrum. The lower the Suppression Rating, the louder (or "harsher") the signature will be interpreted by the ear. The higher the Suppression Rating, the quieter the perceived signature, and the less potentially damaging it is to your ear. The Suppression Rating is tied directly to human inner ear response, which is the same as human perception.
This is veering off into the field of anatomy but it brings up the question, does 'higher peak.yet similarly interpreted', mean that two noises might sound the same but one be more damaging to the ear? Today's OSS HX-QD Subsonic 300 BLK Sound Test Results Here are the updated PEW Science Rankings. Thanks to OSS for taking the time to speak with me about my testing efforts, The Silencer Sound Standard, and the PEW Science mission.Ĭheck out for the Suppression Rating. The data also indicates that this silencer is a relatively inefficient subsonic rifle silencer. 308, yet the sound signature is similarly interpreted by the human inner ear. The data indicates that this silencer has a significantly higher peak sound pressure on subsonic 300 BLK than on supersonic.
The balance of super- and subsonic sound suppression can be significantly different for certain designs care must be taken in a user's silencer selection for a given application. One could argue that it is now irrelevant.Ģ. Single-peak dB sound testing data is highly spurious. With the release of this subsonic data, I believe this is an excellent case study that illustrates:ġ. When I released the supersonic data, I remarked that this is an excellent silencer to showcase the power of the PEW Science Omega parameter. sometimes you need a different mouse trap. How can a silencer with super high mass flow rate trap enough gas to effectively suppress a subsonic cartridge? Spoiler alert. Review 6.45 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the the OSS HX-QD 762 in the subsonic flow regime subsonic 300 BLK ammunition was used in the test, fired from an 8-in barrel.Ĭan a silencer's subsonic performance differ from that in the supersonic flow regime? Sometimes it's more different than you can possibly imagine. I have communicated with the owners of, so if there is any heartburn, let me know.
But, I think we're at the point now where it makes sense for me to post here. I typically don't post data I let it organically proliferate. This is the first time I am making a standalone thread to announce a data publication, since the public release of the Silencer Sound Standard over a year ago.