wait, you are comparing someone elses measurements from different road and conditions? thats funny. It does not work that way as you must know by now so far. SW13GS has shown you readings from same road, same car, different conditions.

 

:Eh, go drive a Dodge cummins diesel from the 90's/early 00's and stop your whining about your Lexus being loud.:boxing


Seriously though, my bet is that you have crap tires. I've always had good luck with Michelans, they're pricey but worth it if you plan to keep the car for a long time. Right now I have low profile 18" Pirelli's on my SC. Great tire, no vibrations, but its just the nature of the beast that something with a 255/30/R18 size is going to be loud.

I'd stay away from Khumo's, other cheap no-name tires, and anything that is low rolling resistance or has "eco" in the name.

 

Another generally excellent line of tires is the Continental Contipro Contact series.

 

Who's whining? I'm attempting to bring a some sort of numerical based evidence however imperfect to our world of luxury. I love many aspect of the suv EXCEPT cabin noise. I think having to listen to music at 85 db is not conducive to long term audio health. It's all fine & dandy going 0-60but just as important is 0-40, 85, or 90 db. Sound plays a huge part in our health in terms.of blood pressure, stress and psychological health. You can deny it but our bodies once hooked up to those bp machines like the sound meters don't lie.
It's not a bad vehicle, it's fixable and that's a good thing. As for the Cummings I did carpool in one for hears when I worked on the oil rigs. It was loud. But acceptable for the environment it was tasked to do.

 

I knoooow this. Just bringing a good ribbing to Lexus by way of comparing a 91 Corolla to a "Luxury" SUV. Like I said many times and as you pointed out there are waaaay to many variables to take into consideration.

But a Corolla = Lexus?

 

I'm digging the Conti's on my IS350. They dropped the loudness in the cabin considerably from the stock run flats. How this carries over to their truck line of tires will be interesting.

Really what I'd like to see is when people go to purchase a new set of tires is to measure for themselves with a meter app and take readings before & after. Instead of relying on audible instruments that are our ears. When was the last time we took a hearing test? While mine are failry good at 18hz-14khz some people not so good. This is more for personal use than a comparison and to have fun but at the same time allow us to have a point if reference when purchasing a new car or tires,
Once these tires are done I will more than likely buy Conti's and seeing I've commuted the same route to work the last 15 years I'll take another reading.

 

Interesting topics. I download this app call dB Decibel 10th and here is my result in my SC430

the only setting it has was @ 10hz

SC430 cabin dB result:
with garage door close & car turn off - 35dB
with garage door open & car turn off -37dB
warming up @ idle - 58dB
After warm up, idle @ 800RPM - 56dB

Not sure how accurate is it. Will test the RX400h tomorrow

 

^^^Very cool thanks for participating! On a side note your car is awful loud off.

Be interesting to see what the 400 measures at 65mph & idle.
Thanks again.

 

This is not correct... for example, one problem I've run into with lower-end/uncalibrated db meters is that they will measure differences differently. So even for comparison's sake, they will not always be accurate.

Personally, I would never take the reading from a smartphone app seriously - not even to measure differences. To put it in perspective, even the most basic industry-standard db meters (Type 2) cost more than smartphones.

Additionally, regardless of the accuracy of the measuring device, the test conditions have to be consistent. Whenever I take measurements, I do averages over time and watch out for spikes or abnormal periods. Even incredibly miniscule factors - things as minor as a refrigerator dozens of feet away running a compressor cycle - totally throw off db readings.

 

^ it depends upon the characteristics of the microphone used on the iPhone. It would be foolish to believe the microphone will treat all frequencies equally.

 

. For those of you not sure of the accuracy of phone apps here is a detailed analysis....
CDC - NIOSH Science Blog – So How Accurate Are These Smartphone Sound Measurement Apps?
A good read.
Bottom line phone apps for the most part can be accurate to +-2 db. Granted a phone from Samsung vs Apple(which according to the article eliminated the high pass filter in their mics for better audio quality) will be different. Apple phones mics seem to be better. But hey, if that's your belief then cool.

http://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-b...09/sound-apps/

 

RX400h cabin dB result:
On the street & car turn off - 37dB
Warming up @ idle & - 47dB
Warming up @ idle with heat fan on - 53dB
After warming up - 37dB (engine off lol)
After warming up with heat fan on - 49dB

The driving was done on city street in NYC, alot of other traffic & outside noise. Cant go fast in city street either. I already speeding @ 35 while city limit is 25
Cursing at 20 MPH with heat fan on - 58~59dB
Cursing at 35 MPH with heat fan on - 62~63dB
Cursing at 40 MPH with heat fan on - 65dB

My commute does not require highway hence no result for 65MPH yet.

 

Cost is no means of quantifying it being better. If they sold as many db meters as apple sold iphones, those db meters might cost 20 dollars at most, and the corollary would be that if apple sold iphones in the same numbers as those db meters, the iphone would cost probably 10 times as much.

 

If by "for the most part", you mean 3 out of 160 Apple apps...

In any case, +/- 2db is not good. Just to put this in perspective, even a cheap, unrated, non-professional-grade SPL meter (that will cost ~$40) is around +/- 1db unweighted. Amusingly, even the SoundMeter app tested in the study costs $20, so it doesn't even seem like much of a bargain. And I'm going to assume (and hope) you didn't pay $20 to run your tests.

That said, one thing that really confused me is that the article specifically mentions that the apps were not calibrated, ostensibly because they wanted to simulate simple use. That makes no sense to me, because the whole point of the article is comparing to more professional usage. It may have made little difference in the results, but at least they should have also run a test with calibration.

Also, to clarify - the researcher(s) explicitly mentioned that the difference between Apple and Android microphones is probably insignificant - it's the ability to bypass the filter that is relevant. My understanding is that the frequency response on smartphone microphones is reasonably flat for a range well beyond voice frequencies, but any filters will significantly change the data.

One interesting aspect mentioned in the article is the ability to use external microphones, something that I completely overlooked. This would bypass all the problems of using the smartphone internal microphone, but would also just add to the cost...

Of course cost doesn't mean something is better. The point is that, in this case, devices that are objectively better cost substantially more and it is devices that are cheaper and objectively worse that are merely trying to simulate the better devices - and after reading the article that rxonmymind posted, apparently not doing a very good job of it.

 

^^Well hey,if the NSA & Co. can listen to our conversations with the phone OFF and still hear us it's good enough for me so there. Let's get back t the regular scheduled program. Take a reading if you like out of curiosity if not then that's fine to. Don't take life too seriously.