Sennheiser MM 450-X

Sennheiser's MM 450-X ($449.95 direct) is a headphone pair that seemingly does it all. It's wired, it streams wireless Bluetooth audio, and has active noise cancellation circuitry. From an audio standpoint, the MM 450-X offers excellent performance whether wired or in Bluetooth mode. The NoiseGard active cancellation feature is a bit less effective, bringing some audible hiss into the equation and, on some tracks with deep bass, adding in distortion at top volumes. If noise cancellation is your top priority, there are better options out there, but if you're primarily interested in Bluetooth and the noise cancellation is merely a convenient extra feature, the MM 450-X is worth your attention.

Design
The MM 450-X has a lightweight, supra-aural (on-ear) design. The black plastic ear cups swivel at joints just above the ear for a more precise fit, and the pads and headband are thoroughly cushioned. A metallic band with the Sennheiser logo etched on it runs through the middle of the black plastic headband. The fit is comfortable at first, but can feel like it's putting a bit too much pressure on the top of your head during longer listening sessions. The larger Sennheiser MM 550-X costs $50 more, but features larger earcups, earpads, and drivers, and also adds a switchable SRS WOW HD effect.

All of the MM 450-X's controls for wireless playback, track navigation, power, and volume are located on the outside panel of the right ear?memorizing which button controls what function is fairly easy. (Your mobile device's volume controls work independently of the volume controls on the headphones.) The Bluetooth button (under-lit in blue) and the NoiseGard button (under-lit in red) are both located on the lower edge of the right ear, along with the jack for the audio cable (for wired listening). A USB connection for charging is located on the left ear, protected by a rubberized cover.

The MM 450-X folds down flat for easy stowing. A black zip-up carrying pouch is included to house the bevy of accessories the headphones ship with. A power adapter (with four slide-on wall socket plugs for various types of outlets) is included, but the USB cable can detach from it if you want to charge your headphones via your computer's USB port. An airline headphone jack adapter and a 1/4-inch headphone jack adapter are also included, as is an audio cable for wired playback?it terminates in a 3.5mm connection. A CD-based manual is also included.

Pairing the MM 450-X with a Bluetooth device is a simple and quick process, assuming the process is also straightforward on your streaming device?it took fewer than 10 seconds to connect on the iPhone 4S.

There's a built-in microphone for making mobile phone calls?audio quality is about as solid as it can get with cellular fidelity. The Bluetooth button can control more than just the pairing process, by the way?holding it down made it auto-dial the last person I called, pressing it once when the headphones were already paired summoned Siri.

Performance
On deep bass tracks at top volumes when streaming wirelessly, the MM 450-X offers powerful audio for its size, and there's no distortion?until you enable the noise cancellation. At top volumes, the NoiseGard noise cancellation begins to distort on tracks with deep bass. At more reasonable volume levels, this isn't an issue, but it's still a bit surprising from a $450 pair. So, with no noise cancellation, we have a solid performance from the Bluetooth streaming MM 450-X, but with NoiseGard on, things can devolve a bit on more challenging tracks at high volumes.

You can also listen to the MM 450-X through the included audio cable. At top volumes, with no noise cancellation on, there is no distortion on deep bass tracks. Connecting the cable automatically disables Bluetooth, but you can still use the NoiseGard functionality?and yes, it still distorts at top volumes whether you're using a cable or not.

Getting back to the audio performance when streaming, the sound signature is typical Sennheiser?rich bass, but not overly boosted, paired with articulate, crisp high-mids. On Bill Callahan's "Drover", his vocals are lent a smooth, crisp treble edge that helps them stand front and center in the mix. The constant drumming pattern receives a nice bit of low-end boost, but not too much. The result is a bright-sounding track that gives priority to vocals and guitar strumming. Bass lovers might wish there were a little more oomph in the lower frequencies. Since the ear pads are pretty small they can sit slightly off-center. Adjusting them might bring a bit more bass response to the mix, but this is not a booming, deep low-end pair.

On Jay-Z and Kanye West's "No Church in the Wild", the kick drum loop has a nice crisp punch, again thanks to the MM 450-X's crisp high-mids. The sub-bass synth hits that punctuate the loop sound a bit less powerful than deep bass fans may wish, but it's the lows and low-mids that get most of the attention, not the sub-bass frequencies. Thus, an electric bass is likely to have a bit more presence than a super-low synth part.

On classical tracks, like John Adams' "The Chairman Dances", the higher register strings, brass, and percussion stand out most in the mix, with the reserved bass response of the MM 450-X subtly gracing the lower register strings with a smidge of boost. But compared with a booming bass headphone pair, like the Denon Urban Raver AH-D320, the MM 450-X sounds almost like it has flat response in comparison. The large drum hits at the end receive a nice amount of low end presence, lending them a little extra power, but this is simply not a powerful, bass-heavy pair.

It's also worth noting that on quieter tracks, like this classical piece, the headphones don't get terribly loud, which isn't an issue if you're in an office or at home, but could be a bit problematic in a noisier environment like the subway or an airplane.

The overall audio performance of the MM 450-X is solid?a bit on the bright side, but with rich, if not overwhelming, bass response. The issues it has with distortion at high volumes when the NoiseGard is activated make its price seem a bit too high. Not many headphones offer both wireless audio and noise cancellation, however. If noise cancellation is your main priority, we love the great-sounding, effective AKG K 490 NC, and the Bose QuietComfort 15 is an industry standard. As far as wireless headphones go, if that is all you need, you can save quite a bit?the Sennheiser MM 100 is a great-sounding, relatively inexpensive option. If you really want both features and have a bit more money to spend, the Sennheiser MM 550-X is a more solid all-around product.

Generally speaking, the MM 450-X is a fantastic Bluetooth headphone pair and a decent, but not amazing, noise-canceling pair. The inclusion of a cable for wired listening makes the headphones even more versatile, but it's hard to overlook the distortion. It shouldn't be viewed as a deal-breaker, as it won't occur with every genre of music, nor at regular listening levels, but it lessens the MM 450-X's value.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/ziffdavis/pcmag/~3/59Lcf2OYvAY/0,2817,2418219,00.asp

howard hughes nationwide race wanderlust gone tyler perry good deeds pretty in pink shark tank

Smoking from hookah not a harmless alternative to cigarettes

Public release date: 18-Apr-2013
[ | E-mail | Share ]

Contact: Jeffrey Norris
jeff.norris@ucsf.edu
415-502-6397
University of California - San Francisco

Smoking tobacco through a hookah is a pastime gaining popularity among the college crowd, but many of them mistakenly believe that using the fragrant water pipe is less harmful than smoking cigarettes.

In a new study at UC San Francisco, researchers measuring chemicals in the blood and urine concluded that hookah smoke contains a different but still harmful mix of toxins. The findings are published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

Peyton Jacob III, PhD, a UCSF research chemist, and Neal Benowitz, MD, a UCSF tobacco researcher, both based at San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, say hookah use exposes smokers to higher levels of carbon monoxide, especially hazardous to those with heart or respiratory conditions, and to higher levels of benzene, long associated with leukemia risk.

"People want to know if it is a lesser health risk if they switch from cigarettes to smoking a water pipe on a daily basis," Jacob said. "We found that water-pipe smoking is not a safe alternative to cigarette smoking, nor is it likely to be an effective harm-reduction strategy."

And compared to non-smokers, Benowitz said, "If you are smoking from a hookah daily, you are likely to be at increased risk for cancer."

Smoking tobacco from a hookah is common in many Middle Eastern countries. In the United States, water pipe tobacco usage traditionally had been most popular among people of Middle Eastern ancestry.

However, a 2009 survey found that three in 10 university students had smoked tobacco from a water pipe on at least one occasion, with hookah use being disproportionately popular among white students, males, and fraternity and sorority members.

Toxins Unique to Hookah Smoking

The UCSF study included eight men and five women, all of whom had previous experience smoking cigarettes and using water pipes. Benowitz and Jacob had the volunteers smoke an average of three water pipe sessions or 11 cigarettes per day.

Levels of a benzene byproduct doubled in the urine of volunteers after using a hookah in comparison to after smoking cigarettes. Occupational exposure to benzene has been shown to increase the risk of developing leukemia.

Furthermore, the researchers measured carbon monoxide in the breath over 24 hours and found levels 2.5 higher after water pipe use in comparison to cigarette smoking.

The differences in the slew of toxins that ended up in the bodies of volunteers were due largely to the fact that the smokers were smoking two different materials, according to Benowitz. Hookah users are smoking more than just tobacco.

"You're basically burning a charcoal briquette on top of the tobacco," Benowitz said, "and most of what you're smoking is a moist fruit preparation, which is mixed with the tobacco. It smells good and it tastes good."

However, Jacob said, "In addition to delivering toxic substances from the charcoal and tobacco, the heat causes chemical reactions in the mixture which produce toxic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Some PAHs are highly carcinogenic and can cause lung cancer."

Intake of nicotine, the addictive component of tobacco, was less with water pipe use. Among those not yet addicted, the most common pattern of hookah use in the United States about once per week is not likely to cause addiction, Benowitz said.

In general, exposures for various known toxins differed for the two modes of smoking, the researchers found.

Individuals vary in how their bodies metabolize and excrete toxic substances, so for a better comparison, the researchers had the same person smoke cigarettes and a water pipe on different days.

###

Additional authors of the UCSF study include former physiological nursing student Ahmad Abu Raddaha, PhD; research physician Delia Dempsey, MD; and staff research associates Chris Havel, Margaret Peng, and Lisa Yu. The research was funded by the California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program and by the National Institutes of Health.

UCSF is a leading university dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care.

Follow UCSF
UCSF.edu | Facebook.com/ucsf | Twitter.com/ucsf | YouTube.com/ucsf

---

[ | E-mail | Share ]

?

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Public release date: 18-Apr-2013
[ | E-mail | Share ]

Contact: Jeffrey Norris
jeff.norris@ucsf.edu
415-502-6397
University of California - San Francisco

Smoking tobacco through a hookah is a pastime gaining popularity among the college crowd, but many of them mistakenly believe that using the fragrant water pipe is less harmful than smoking cigarettes.

In a new study at UC San Francisco, researchers measuring chemicals in the blood and urine concluded that hookah smoke contains a different but still harmful mix of toxins. The findings are published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

Peyton Jacob III, PhD, a UCSF research chemist, and Neal Benowitz, MD, a UCSF tobacco researcher, both based at San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, say hookah use exposes smokers to higher levels of carbon monoxide, especially hazardous to those with heart or respiratory conditions, and to higher levels of benzene, long associated with leukemia risk.

"People want to know if it is a lesser health risk if they switch from cigarettes to smoking a water pipe on a daily basis," Jacob said. "We found that water-pipe smoking is not a safe alternative to cigarette smoking, nor is it likely to be an effective harm-reduction strategy."

And compared to non-smokers, Benowitz said, "If you are smoking from a hookah daily, you are likely to be at increased risk for cancer."

Smoking tobacco from a hookah is common in many Middle Eastern countries. In the United States, water pipe tobacco usage traditionally had been most popular among people of Middle Eastern ancestry.

However, a 2009 survey found that three in 10 university students had smoked tobacco from a water pipe on at least one occasion, with hookah use being disproportionately popular among white students, males, and fraternity and sorority members.

Toxins Unique to Hookah Smoking

The UCSF study included eight men and five women, all of whom had previous experience smoking cigarettes and using water pipes. Benowitz and Jacob had the volunteers smoke an average of three water pipe sessions or 11 cigarettes per day.

Levels of a benzene byproduct doubled in the urine of volunteers after using a hookah in comparison to after smoking cigarettes. Occupational exposure to benzene has been shown to increase the risk of developing leukemia.

Furthermore, the researchers measured carbon monoxide in the breath over 24 hours and found levels 2.5 higher after water pipe use in comparison to cigarette smoking.

The differences in the slew of toxins that ended up in the bodies of volunteers were due largely to the fact that the smokers were smoking two different materials, according to Benowitz. Hookah users are smoking more than just tobacco.

"You're basically burning a charcoal briquette on top of the tobacco," Benowitz said, "and most of what you're smoking is a moist fruit preparation, which is mixed with the tobacco. It smells good and it tastes good."

However, Jacob said, "In addition to delivering toxic substances from the charcoal and tobacco, the heat causes chemical reactions in the mixture which produce toxic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Some PAHs are highly carcinogenic and can cause lung cancer."

Intake of nicotine, the addictive component of tobacco, was less with water pipe use. Among those not yet addicted, the most common pattern of hookah use in the United States about once per week is not likely to cause addiction, Benowitz said.

In general, exposures for various known toxins differed for the two modes of smoking, the researchers found.

Individuals vary in how their bodies metabolize and excrete toxic substances, so for a better comparison, the researchers had the same person smoke cigarettes and a water pipe on different days.

###

Additional authors of the UCSF study include former physiological nursing student Ahmad Abu Raddaha, PhD; research physician Delia Dempsey, MD; and staff research associates Chris Havel, Margaret Peng, and Lisa Yu. The research was funded by the California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program and by the National Institutes of Health.

UCSF is a leading university dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care.

Follow UCSF
UCSF.edu | Facebook.com/ucsf | Twitter.com/ucsf | YouTube.com/ucsf

---

[ | E-mail | Share ]

?

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Source: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-04/uoc--sfh041813.php

2013 toyota avalon the secret life of bees full moon aubrey o day johan santana viktor bout ncaa hockey

Arkansas residents seek millions after Exxon crude oil spill

Sofia Perpetua , NBC News ? ? ? 6 hrs.

Two Arkansas residents filed a class action lawsuit against Exxon Mobil Friday, demanding to be compensated for damages after a crude oil pipeline ruptured the week before in their subdivision outside Little Rock, Ark.

Kathryn Chunn and Kimla Greene, residents of Ledrick Circle, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court on behalf of themselves and other affected residents and are seeking more than $5 million in damages. According to the 16-page document, which was posted on the Arkansas Times website Friday, homeowners within 3,000 feet of the pipeline were impacted by the spill that occurred in Mayflower, Ark., a suburb 20 miles from Little Rock.

Read the lawsuit (.pdf)

According to the lawsuit, 19,000 barrels were spilled in what the residents are calling the ?worst spill in Arkansas history.? Exxon, however, says the equivalent of 5,000 crude oil barrels were spilled.

The lawsuit says the pipeline?s capacity was increased by 50 percent in 2009 and that the line was not adequately maintained or inspected. The 65-year-old Pegasus pipeline transports crude oil from Canada between Illinois and Texas.

Exxon has not responded to the lawsuit but said in an online statement that it is paying for the cleanup and "will honor all valid claims."

In an online briefing Saturday, the company said the spill mostly affected the yards of six homes. The company says the water supply has not been tainted. Exxon also pointed to air quality reports produced by the Environmental Protection Agency, which show an increase in carbon monoxide in some areas around the spill, but no increases in other emissions.

Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel launched an investigation last week into what caused the spill and the subsequent recovery efforts, and the investigation may be used as evidence for the plaintiffs. An Exxon spokeswoman told Reuters that the company will ?cooperate fully? with any investigation.

Meantime, the 22 residents who were evacuated from their homes have not been able to return. State health authorities are still working on a plan for a safe return.

Mayflower, Ark., Chief of Police Bob Satkowski told Channel 7 News in Little Rock that those residents had to leave their homes because of health risks from the crude oil fumes and possible fires.

ExxonMobil initially downplayed environmental concerns, saying that the air quality didn't likely present a human health risk, ?with the exception of high-pooling areas.?

EPA officials said the cleanup would be long and expensive, according to KARK. Exxon has since said it would pay for the cleanup.

The oil spill came at a bad time for crude oil public relations. Two days before the spill, Reuters reported that a train carrying crude oil derailed in Minnesota and spilled up to 30,000 gallons.

The week before, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration recommended fining Exxon Mobil Pipeline Company $1.7 million for how the company responded to a crude oil pipeline failure in the Yellowstone River in Montana.

The Mayflower, Ark. oil spill was more than 10 times more significant than the Montana spill, which leaked 1,509 barrels.

To put these numbers in perspective: The 1989 Exxon Valdez spill poured 260,000 to 750,000 gallons into Alaskan waters.

The 2010 Deep Water Horizon oil spill, the most significant oil spill in the U.S., leaked 4.9 million barrels into the Gulf Coast.

Source: http://feeds.nbcnews.com/c/35002/f/653351/s/2a7086f5/l/0L0Snbcnews0N0Cbusiness0Carkansas0Eresidents0Eseek0Emillions0Eafter0Eexxon0Ecrude0Eoil0Espill0E1C9254722/story01.htm

Cam Cameron Ada Lovelace 12/12/12 manny pacquiao Chopper Live jerry brown michael buble

Texas A&M Student Senate Passes Measure Allowing Religion ...

The Texas A&M Student Senate last night voted 35-28 in favor of a measure allowing students to opt out of funding the campus GLBT Resource Center if they have religious objections, the Dallas Voice reports:

Less than 24 hours before the vote, the name of the bill was changed from the ?GLBT Funding Opt Out Bill? to the ?The Religious Funding Exemption Bill,? and specific references to the GLBT Resource Center were removed. However, opponents of the bill who packed a Student Senate meeting before the vote Wednesday said the name change did not alter the bill?s discriminatory, anti-gay intent.

With the crowd spilling into the hallways, an overflow viewing room was set up, and the Senate meeting had to be stopped several times so administrators could clear fire exits, according to a report in The Eagle of Bryan-College Station. Emotions ran high, with senators cursing and the woman assigned to tally their votes bursting into tears.

KBTX reports on the contentious meeting and has a long piece on the history of the bill:

According to a university spokesman, the GLBT Resource Center receives about $100,000 a year in funding provided by student fees, averaging out to a contribution of around $2 per student.

GLBT Aggies President Kimberly Villa says the center provides a "safe space" for those students who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered, and that a vote in any way to strategically divert funding would hurt a population which has experienced a history of discrimination on the Texas A&M Campus. The center provides reference materials, counseling support, and programming concerning GLBT health and awareness issues.

The "Religious Funding Exemption Bill" was originally written by a student who felt morally and religiously opposed to paying fees that go towards the Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Resource Center on campus.

A&M Student Body President John Claybrook (who took the inset photo that was published by kbtx) has the option to veto the measure but has not said if he will.

(image kbtx)

UPDATE: Zack Ford at Think Progress makes note of this even more heinous development:

Though it?s unclear this student-led attack on LGBT Aggies is enforceable, the state legislature is considering a broader change that very well could. Texas Rep. Bill Zedler (R) has filed an amendment to the state?s appropriations bill to cut funding for public universities that have ?Gender and Sexuality Centers and Related Student Centers.? The amendment offensively claims that the centers promote behaviors that have a high risk for disease:

An institution of higher education may not use money appropriated to the institution under this Act, or any property or facility of the institution funded by appropriations under this Act, to support, promote, or encourage any behavior that would lead to high risk behavior for AIDS, HIV, Hepatitis B, or any sexually transmitted disease.

Source: http://www.towleroad.com/2013/04/texas-am-student-senate-passes-measure-allowing-religion-based-discrimination-against-campus-glbt-ce.html

Aaron Paul packers Dancing With The Stars All Stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt space shuttle Torrey Smith Brother fiona apple