Introducing the Sensear Intrinsically Safe Double Protection Headset

Many of you might not heard of Sensear, they are making big strides in the headset industry, here is their latest offering.

Sensear, a global leader in developing and manufacturing best-in-class digital communication headsets, announced the release today of their new Intrinsically Safe Double Protection Headset (IS-SDP). Based on Sensear's existing SM1xSR IS headset, and incorporating the double protection feature from Sensear's current non-IS double protection headset; the new IS-SDP headset includes an improved boom microphone, and will interface with a variety of two-way radios both cabled and via Bluetooth for wireless operations.  Bluetooth can also be used with IS Smart phones and other IS Bluetooth devices.



The Sensear IS-SDP headset was developed from a marketplace need for a high performance intrinsically safe headset for extreme noise environments that require Class 1 Div 1 certification. Double hearing protection (both ear plugs and ear muffs) is often required when exposures may exceed 95 decibels (dBA) in many critical working areas. At the same time operators in these environments are required to use two-way radios to hear site communications and respond appropriately. Without the use of an appropriate intrinsically safe headset communications on site can potentially be very difficult.

The ear-plugs for the IS-SDP are hard wired to the headset allowing for dual protection, and communications to be directly understood by the operator. The IS-SDP's 31 dB NRR combined with Sensear's patented SENSâ„¢ technology allow operators to protect their hearing at a safe level of 82 dB, communicate effectively between co-workers via two-way radio and Bluetooth and maintain 360-degree awareness.

"We were excited about the development of the IS-SDP the early beginnings of Sensear grew from creating unique solutions for many industrial environments," said Peter Larsson, CEO.  "The IS-SDP continues to show our commitment to developing practical, usable products that solve the communication challenges in heavy industry."

Source - http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/introducing-the-sensear-intrinsically-safe-double-protection-headset-300052146.html

RFID and AIDC News: What is Zebra's Strategy for Motorola's Mobile Wireless and Data Collection Businesses?

In early 2014, printing and RFID system focused Zebra Technologies announced it was acquiring the "Enterprise Systems" business from Motorola Solutions, in a deal that closed in late October. That left Motorola to focus on its radio systems business.

It was a somewhat surprising move, certainly moving Zebra up the supply chain food change. What was the strategy behind the deal? How fast and how far will the integration of Motorola into Zebra go? Is Zebra now a "solutions" company?

SCDigest editor Dan Gilmore recently interviewed Mike Terzich, Zebra's Chief Administrative Officer who is leading the integration program, on these and several other topics.

Gilmore: Mike, before we start talking about the Motorola Enterprise acquisition, you've been around the Auto ID industry for two decades. Not long ago, it was a very recognized and defined space. Now, not so much. It doesn't receive much press coverage at all today, though SCDigest is trying to rectify that a bit. Is it because it's just so easy to make it work today that end users just don't need much education any more?

Terzich: I think part of the reason that it has evolved the way it has is that if you look at who the industry icons were back in the day, the Intermecs, the Symbols [Symbol Technologies], the Telxons, the Hand Held Products, Datamax - all of them have been consolidated up into large industrial conglomerates. Zebra is really one of the last of the independents.

For years, you had so much independent development, and every manufacturer had their own operating language and everything was proprietary, so that added a dimension of complexity that users had to deal with. Over time, as architectures became more open and interoperable, the mystery kind of disappeared on how to implement and integrate this stuff. The question now is not really about the technical aspects, but issues like how to optimize my assets across my supply chain network. Today it is much more of an application and business question than it is a technical one with Auto ID.

Gilmore: I must admit the Motorola announcement took me a bit by surprise, though it was clear there were some tensions within the old Motorola Solutions between the radio side and the wireless and data collection businesses. What was Zebra's strategy in making this deal?

Terzich: A little bit history - we tried to be part of the opportunity back in 2006 and 2007 when Symbol Technologies was put on the market and eventually found its way to Motorola. We made a pitch at the time - I was personally involved - and as I like to say we were a day late and a dollar short in terms of making a deal.

So our interest level from a strategic perspective has really been in place for seven years. So when the opportunity re-presented itself last year, our CEO Anders Gustafsson and Motorola started to have some conversations. For us, it was always about the attraction of where we saw the market evolving, and this whole concept around enterprise apps and intelligence, the interest of companies to optimize across their value chains, and we felt that the combination of Zebra and the enterprise mobility business from Motorola made complete sense because it allowed us to offer a broader portfolio and a higher percentage of the solution offering.

For us, it also allows us to become closer to the application development side of the business. As a printing company, while we had a vision and an aspiration to be part of where enterprises were willing to go in terms of managing their business, it's hard to lead application and solution development around your brand when you're the printing component. Printing has become almost second nature today, while the wireless business and the portfolio Motorola has there in terms of mobile computing and the trends were we seeing with Cloud-based application development, the Internet of Things, asset optimization, and ubiquitous mobility - that's what enticed us to say this is still a very relevant strategic opportunity today as it was back in 2007.

Gilmore: I understand you have rather fully integrated Motorola in already. I would have thought that initially, given the very different nature of the business, that you would have started with it as separate SBU. I also understand you are quickly getting rid of the Motorola brand name in favor of it all being Zebra Technologies. Is that correct, and if Yes, what was the thinking?

Terzich: It's semi-correct. Where we are integrated is in our go-to-market strategy and our face to the customer. When you look at where Motorola Enterprise Mobility was selling, who their customers were and their routes to market, it was a combination of strategically calling on some very large end users and a significant reseller and integrator channel. It turned out that the amount of common end user customers and channel partners between Zebra and Motorola Enterprise is really quite significant.

So we had the opportunity to integrate sales forces, and when you think about it through the eyes of the sales team, your carrying more products in your sales bag, you are selling largely to the same channel partners that Zebra and Motorola were both selling to independently. The largest end users are mostly customers in common, so there was some natural synergistic opportunity in our go to market model.

Where we have remained separate is in the R&D and development side, because the product lines are complementary not competitive, and over time Motorola's competency in mobile computing, data collection and wireless networks are unique skill sets for us. So we are maintaining separate engineering and product development organizations, but we come together with a common global sales and marketing organization.

Gilmore: And what about the branding? Is the Motorola name gone, it is now all Zebra Technologies going forward?

Terzich: From a contractual/legal perspective, we have to get off the name and the "batwings" [the Motorola logo] as part of the transaction, so it's not like we have a choice. We can however leverage the Symbol Technologies brand, and we are going to do that as a product brand is some isolated areas. But Symbol as a name has been out of circulation for about seven years, and while it has some affinity say in the reseller community, the long term strategy is that everything will be branded Zebra Technologies.

But in the transitional period there will be some product that have to transfer to a Symbol products sub-brand as a means to get off of the Motorola bat wings.

Gilmore: What's your take on wireless systems market? It really now is just down in the US to just two major players, Honeywell and now Zebra. Is it is still a good market, a growth market?

Terzich: What's interesting about the combination is we're now number one in mobile computing, number one in data collection, and number one in printing. We have a very large global service organization. And then you get to wireless LAN, and that's the fifth of our major revenue buckets.

What's interesting about wireless LAN is that it has the highest growth profile of any of those segments, but clearly Motorola's position here is not number 1. You have some very large players [e.g., Cisco] that operate in a more horizontal market mode, and focus generally on more "carpeted" areas of a business, versus a distribution center or shop floor or a retail store. I think Motorola had done a nice job of carving out a niche relative to some markets that we service, principally in the retail and some of the hospitality markets, and the product has been successful and we have quite a bit of customer loyalty in these sectors.

So our strategy going forward from a wireless LAN perspective is to be very vertically focused and application specific where the product has some advantages, and to build off that customer loyalty. We don't think the answer is to compete broadly in the wireless LAN marketplace because we don't have the R&D engine or the brand equity in some of those markets or applications.

So we are going to stick to our knitting, which will concentrated in retail, hospitality and healthcare, where our product seems to resonate.

Gilmore: You and Motorola use primarily a channels strategy. Are you in the solutions business, and can you do that if you use a channels strategy and are one-step removed from the customer?



Terzich: Great question.

One of the things that most people don't realize is that Zebra, organically before the Motorola acquisition, had about 80% of its business through channels and about 20% through some large, named strategic accounts. And those accounts tended to be some very sophisticated adopters of technology that effectively act as their own systems integrator.

These are large retailers, large transportation companies, and large manufacturers that well understand how to deploy technology to drive efficiency and productivity. So that was our composite, and Motorola's was very similar, the difference being that because Motorola offered enterprise mobile computing, they tended to call a little higher in those organizations, and they worked more closely with application developers and independent software developers because usually the real problem is solved by application software and re-engineering of business processes.

So Motorola may have been calling on maybe 40% of its revenue from a strategic account perspective, and that means they had a seat at the end user table and they are influencing those companies, even if those are sometimes still being fulfilled through channels.

So where do we fall in the solutions spectrum? Both product lines do not constitute a solution by themselves, they still need to connect to application software and that requires integration support. So the channel will remain a very vital part of the strategy.

At a very simple level, we see that there are opportunities for better enabling application software. So how do we make mobile printing devices and mobile computing and data collection devices better together from a product design set? How do we make our technology more interoperable and attractive for application development?

When you look at this technology and how ubiquitous it is you, find that deployment is really though many hundreds of application developers. You don't see a small number of applications as being really dominant. Our job is to continue to work with those developers to make our solutions as easy to integrate with them as we can.

No CIO or CFO goes to bed at night thinking "I need to bar code something." But they do wake up and say I need to take a billion dollars out my supply chain, or whatever the figure is. What we do is often a key piece of what becomes the strategy to achieve those goals.

Gilmore: If I understand it right, you have released your own Voice solution, originally developed by Motorola's Psion unit in Europe, here into the US market. Before, Motorola relied exclusively on partners here for Voice software. What is the strategy?

Terzich: Ultimately, Voice as a technology is just another extension of using mobility to make operations more productive and efficient, especially in warehousing applications. So it's really just a continuum to us of bringing more capability to those that are trying to optimize workflow. Workflow has become without question one of the biggest areas of opportunity across anyone's supply chain. This is part of why we are so excited about the combined portfolio in general, and our Voice solution is part of that.

Gilmore: Mike, appreciate you sharing your insight today.

Terzich: Thanks Dan. I enjoyed the conversation.

For more information and conversation visit the source of this article - http://www.scdigest.com/ontarget/15-02-04-1.php?cid=8965

Bluetooth Earpieces Do Battle With the $3,000 Hearing Aid

One night in June 2010, New York composer Richard Einhorn went to bed in a motel feeling stuffy and woke up almost completely deaf. At the time, Einhorn, who wrote the oratorio Voices of Light, had limited ways to deal with his nightmare condition, known as sudden sensorineural hearing loss. He visited an audiologist and bought a hearing aid for $3,000. (His insurance plan, like most, didn’t cover it.) Unhappy with the expense and the limits of the earpiece’s technology, which struggled to adapt to different noise levels, Einhorn began searching for alternative gadgets that could restore more of his hearing for less money.

Today, he has a backpack full of them. To supplement his old-school hearing aid, he favors a $350 iPhone-linked earpiece made by Sound World Solutions, a hearing-hardware maker in Park Ridge, Ill., for whom he’s begun to consult. With the Sound World device on, he can amplify phone calls and streaming music as well as his surroundings. A third, $500 earpiece was custom-made by Ultimate Ears in Irvine, Calif., to help him detect a wider range of musical tones while composing. For restaurants and theaters, he has a $45 directional microphone that pairs with a $5 app to isolate desired voices. And for especially cacophonous places, he has spare $700 microphones, made by Etymotic Research in Elk Grove Village, Ill., that he can strap to companions.

Einhorn credits the audio patchwork with saving his career and his life. “It’s incredible,” he says over lunch in a busy restaurant, as he toggles the proper setting on his phone.

The Bluetooth-connected earpieces aren’t classified as hearing aids by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. They’re called personal sound amplification products, or PSAPs. Basic versions of such devices have existed for more than a decade in lonely RadioShack aisles and a handful of other places. But in the past 18 months, advances in circuitry and low-energy Bluetooth transmission have helped developers radically improve the designs to make high-quality, long-lasting alternativesto hearing aids while keeping pricesat a fraction of the industry standard.

Whatever regulators or insurers call them, PSAP manufacturers are angling to expand the $6 billion global market for hearing technology. Largely due to the cost, 75 percent of the 34 million Americans with hearing loss don’t use aids, says David Kirkwood, the editor of industry blog Hearing Health & Technology Matters. “A lot of people will continue to pay for traditional hearing aids,” he says. “But there are now inexpensive, easy-to-get alternatives.”



Part of the reason PSAPs are cheap is that they’re unregulated. Hearing-aid fittings and audiological calibrations account for much of the cost of aids from the big six makersâ€"Siemens, Sonova, Starkey Hearing Technologies, William Demant, GN ReSound, and Widex. A midlevel pair that retails for $4,400 costs about $440 to manufacture, according to AARP. Research and development spending is also a factor: Unlike the free Bluetooth standard used by upstarts such as Sound World, old-school hearing aids run on proprietary signal processing and transmission technology. Siemens, Sonova, and Widex declined to comment; GN ReSound, Starkey, and William Demant didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Still, being kept out of doctors’ offices has been a huge problem for PSAP makers, says Venkat Rajan, who tracks medical devices for researcher Frost & Sullivan. While the size of the market can be difficult to gauge given the lack of regulation, anecdotal evidence suggests sales have been soft, he says. It doesn’t help that, according to industry journal the Hearing Review, the average American buying a hearing aid is 71 years old. “Trying to find that customer base has been difficult,” Rajan says.

The marketing of hearing aids, classified as medical devices by the FDA since 1977, is strictly regulated in the U.S. According to agency guidelines that predate the latest generation of equipment, PSAP makers aren’t allowed to market their products as medical devices. Instead, they’re supposed to be used recreationally by people who can already hear comfortably. The FDA, which wouldn’t say whether it plans to change its rules, occasionally issues warnings to companies it believes to be violating them, so PSAP ads tend to include at least one verbal somersault. An ad for Etymotic describes its latest product, the Bean, thusly: “Not a hearing aid but has many advantages.”

The $300 Bean is the brainchild of Mead Killion, the co-founder of Etymotic. He invented the analog hi-fi amplification technology behind the device back in 1988, but says it’s only since 2013 that circuitry has become cheap enough for the product to be worth manufacturing en masse. His company uses the same technology in adaptive earplugs designed for orchestra musicians or infantry troops to keep music or conversation audible while dampening loud noises. A decade ago, Killion failed to persuade the FDA that early PSAPs should be sold over the counter. He’s lobbying for a contract with the Department of Defense.

Normally, I hear fine, but I conducted a hands-on experiment shortly before an interview with Killion. It became clear that having professional help putting these things in is a good idea. Initially, one Bean in each ear made it easy to hear faraway gossip in a noisy Whole Foods. Then I pushed them too far, and suddenly could hear nothing at all. Killion said the problem was waxy buildup in my narrow ear canals, so the next step was a $150 cerumenectomyâ€"that is, getting a doctor to scrape out gobs of wax and clear the blockage.

The era of Internet diagnosis hasn’t eliminated the need for medical professionals, says Erin Miller, president of the American Academy of Audiology. “This is our biggest problem with the PSAPs in general,” she says. “We want to make sure someone has looked in the patient’s ear.” All the more reason, PSAP makers argue, to put their products in medical offices next to those from Starkey and ReSound. For now, the companies’ sales will be limited to true believers like Einhorn, the composer. “You have to remember that I’m a maniac,” he says. “I will do anything to hear as best as possible in any situation.”

What we say: Whilst Bluetooth is regarded as an old technology now the reliability can't be questioned. It would seem that this type of technology is a log time coming to a thirsty industry for inventive technology. Source - http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-05/hearing-aid-alternatives-get-cheaper-more-powerful 

Why Are Headphones Becoming More Popular?

There’s a simple answer to this one. Headphones are increasing in popularity at a similar rate as portable devices are. The more devices get sold, the greater headsets get sold, it really is that simple.

Headphones are useless without gadgets, ergo, if headphones are selling well, it stands to reason that devices are too and vice versa.

The exceptional success of the Tablet PC and also the MP3 player has a lot to do with this. Socially, the iPod’s impact may be profound. When I used to be little, anybody over the ages of about 16 who was wearing headphones and not jogging looked stupid, they looked like some type of impotent man-child caught in a desperate try to re-capture lost youth. These odd adults were regarded as curiosities, due partially to their ludicrous walk, which seemed to parody those of a constipated penguin.

Today of course, it's perfectly normal for any person of any age to own an iPod. Even US President Barack Obama was asked about his iPod whilst on the campaign trail. So, with everyone using iPods, headphone sales are on the rise.

Of course, along with the rise in portable devices came the rise in Internet gaming, another product that requires headphones. Of course, to properly play online, you'll need a good pair of headphones.



These days, it seems as if everything uses (or can use) headphones. If I can’t sleep at nighttime, I listen to music on my headphones so as not to wake my girlfriend up and I listen to music whenever I go out anywhere, just like everybody else.

Next time you’re out somewhere, look around you and try just how many of us are wearing headsets.

Headsets inevitably need replacing, which leads inexorably to even more sales. Now that everybody is wearing haedphones, even the uncool are cool, which is weird when you think about it.

New Device Delivers Sound Through Tongue to Let Deaf People Hear

While we naturally think that we hear with our ears, it is really the brain that converts sound waves into what we perceive as sound. Our most distinctive organ also has a lot of plasticity, being able to adapt its regions to perform tasks normally not assigned to them. Blind people, for example, often have the part of the brain responsible for vision working to more precisely interpret audio and create a better mental picture of what’s around. This principle is what led researchers at Colorado State University to attempt to use the tongue as a medium for passing sound to the brain in deaf people.

The researchers developed a flat shaped neurostimulator with a bunch of electrodes in a grid at one end. It’s connected wirelessly via Bluetooth to an earpiece that captures sound. The system processes the audio signals received by the earpiece and converts them into electrical pulses that are delivered through the stimulator. The user simply presses his tongue against the electrodes on the mouthpiece and feels tingling or vibration. The idea is that this sensation, really sound interpreted another way, can be translated by the brain into perceived audio if given proper training.

There’s much work to be done to prove the technology and make it practical. Currently, the researchers are mapping out the tongue’s nerves and studying how volunteers respond to the electrical stimulation. They’re trying to figure out whether the device will work uniformly for all people or whether it will need to be individually customized. The researchers hope that this technology will become a new option competing with cochlear implants and that it may help overcome hearing loss for a wide variety of people.

How Does Spy Earpiece Work?

The spy earpiece is a gadget of the future that facilitates our lives. With the spy earpiece invisible communication is performed in most troublesome situations when cover assistance is necessary.

The main feature of the spy earpiece is its complete invisibility. First of all, the spy earpiece goes in beige hue that is very close to skin color. So when you insert it into the ear, nobody can even notice it. Besides, the spy earpiece can boast of super tiny dimensions that ensure absolute invisibility of the gadget when it is in the ear.

The good news is the spy earpiece is available on the market in diverse gadget sets. The most popular of them are Bluetooth Set, Watch Set, MP3 Set and Glasses Set. Each one of the sets listed above has an in-built transmitter and a microphone (in the loop for Bluetooth and MP3, in the bow of the glasses and on the reverse side of the watch). Thanks to the transmitter, the gadget gets connected to the cell phone. And thanks to the sensitive microphone your partner will hear your every word even if you whisper. So, as you can see the spy earpiece set consists of the transmitter with an embedded microphone and a spy earpiece with a battery.

It is pretty easy to use the spy earpiece. What you have to do is the following sequence of steps:

· Put the transmitter. If you use the Bluetooth or MP3 spy earpiece set, you are supposed to put on the loop round your neck. Make sure that the loop is properly hidden under your clothes. For Spy earpiece Watch set you put on the watch on your wrist, and for Spy earpiece Glasses set â€" just use it like ordinary glasses.

· Insert the battery into the spy earpiece. Every set comes with a detailed guidance for that, so don’t be afraid of doing something wrong. Anyway, if the quality of sound is unsatisfactory, try to change the position of the battery.

· Put the spy earpiece into the ear. Here you should remember that you always have to clean ear canals beforehand. Otherwise, the spy earpiece filter will choke up with earwax and sound will deteriorate significantly. In the worst case the spy earpiece will fail to work.

· Make a call. When you are ready with preparations just make a call and put the cell phone into your pocket. You won’t need it any more. Now the covert communication is established. You can hear what your partner is saying.

· Pull the spy earpiece out. This is very easy to do thanks to a special ejection cord every spy earpiece has. You can see it in any picture.

· Take out the battery. Be careful about pulling out the battery. You have to do it only with the help of a paper pin so that not to damage the spy earpiece. In case you won’t take it out, the battery will discharge.

With the help of the spy earpiece you will never feel embarrassed and confused when speaking in public, writing a test, having an interview or taking an exam. The spy earpiece will help you to feel confident and be successful.



Source - http://osanellona.hubpages.com/hub/How-Does-Spy-Earpiece-Work

Police Earpieces

There are a wide variety of Police Earpieces on the market, whether you need an Overt or Covert police Earpiece, listen only or with Push To Talk (PTT) and Microphone, whether you want in ear or headset, D Shape, G Shape or Acoustic and choice is to be honest 100% personal preference! What I will do today is run over the basic pro's and con's of each type of police earpiece and their normal uses but ultimately you have to try a few different types and find what works for you.

With covert ear pieces you have a couple of options a wireless in ear receiver and hidden mic that runs to a minimum of £200 and probably more like £500 or the more common acoustic earpiece with clear coiled tube which will set you back anywhere between £12 and £20.  The clear tube runs out of the back of the wearers shirt collar and loops over the top of the ear and into the ear canal.  There are two options then for fitting the tube into the ear canal, either the standard "Mushroom Tip" which blocks the whole ear canal of the "Gel Earpiece Insert" that fits into the ear well to hold it in place and then a smaller tube runs into the ear canal allowing both clear transmission of comms without the earpiece completely cutting off ambient local sounds.  Acoustic Covert earpieces can have a 3 wire PTT and Mic allowing the mic to be lapel mounted or hidden in a sleeve or listen only.

G Shape police ear pieces fit like an inverted G made of black plastic or rubber, hooked over the top of the ear with the earpiece speaker coming down to the opening of the ear canal (some ear pieces have it swivel mounted others don't).  General consensus is that the G shape earpiece is the most comfortable for the most users.

D Shape Police Earpieces (surprisingly enough) are black plastic or rubber D Shapes with the curve hooking round the back of the ear and the straight part running down the centre of the ear with the speaker mounted in the middle to align with the ear opening.  These do not fit as close to the ear as a G Shape earpiece and people with bigger ears may tend to find they flap about like Dumbo when running!!

Both D and G Shape earpieces are available in PTT and Mic or listen only and will normally set you back anywhere between £10 and £20.



Earpieceonline has the most common police radio earpieces are for Motorola MTH800 and CP040 Series, Sepura SRP 2000 series and a few models of Kenwood.