High frequency sine waves are not that comfortable, yes. But in music, what instruments can play this high frequencies?
Maybe some overtones from cymbals, flutes? I don't know.
It's definitely not a show stopper if you can't hear above 15kHz.
As a percentage of meaningful enjoyable sound in a song I reckon it probably contributes 3/5 of SFA.
Thanks for the tip. I'll look through my library and see if I can find any solo violins and run the track through MasVis program.
Another good one here as it plts the shape of your response on screen,
Equal loudness contours and audiometry - Test your own hearing
Equal loudness contours and audiometry - Test your own hearing
I've done these sorts of tests before over the web, and I consistently have drop-off starting at 14k, using my etymotic er6 IEMs. I don't know if that's due to the drivers or my hearing, or both. I'm 35.
There's at least a study or two in scientific journals that suggests humans have different perceptions of high frequency material besides what we normally call "hearing." Our brains still interpret inaudible material.
I've also noticed some extra HF on some recordings of trumpets show up in spectrum analyzers (in foobar).
There's at least a study or two in scientific journals that suggests humans have different perceptions of high frequency material besides what we normally call "hearing." Our brains still interpret inaudible material.
I've also noticed some extra HF on some recordings of trumpets show up in spectrum analyzers (in foobar).
First off, please respect forum rules on language.
Second, irrespective of what you think "most" 18 year olds can do, many can do quite a bit better. I've known males in their late 20s who could verifiably hear 21-22kHz tones. Sure, it's not typical (I certainly couldn't), but it's not unknown.
That high up it's all about the harmonic structure. All instruments fundamentals are, if broken down, sine waves, the way the harmonics fall + the atonal components, is what makes a clarinet sound like a clarinet and an oboe sound like an oboe.
That isn't particularly helpful when it comes to specific frequencies, but as Bob said, a violin can play up to around a C8, which is two octaves above a sopranos top C. The top C has its fundamental placed at 1044Hz, placing the violins top fundamental at 4176Hz. Obviously then the second and third harmonics lie at 8.3kHz and 12.5kHz, not to mention the higher harmonics too.
So yes, some instruments do have significant content in the last two octaves, the brain however is quite capable at compensating, to a reasonable degree, when your ears don't function quite as they should. I am sure that a gradual reduction in your high frequency hearing over time goes by largely unnoticed, but if this continues beyond a certain point it's got to impact on the way things sound.
Re harmonics / overtones, this might be of interest: There's life above 20 kilohertz! A survey of musical instrument spectra to 102.4 kHz This is not my field so I can't really make any comments worth making.
I have thanks. Last time was ~6 months ago in a friend's home studio. Lynn Olson Ariels with Scan Speak D2905/9500 tweeters. Same result.
News to me. I am aware of some studies that showed significant HF loss in teenagers who have been regularly exposed to high SPLs for prolonged periods. No surprise there. Not all teenagers are though.
Hardly. People differ as do environmental factors. Some are fortunate enough to retain their HF hearing for longer than others, in the same way that some retain certain aspects of their vision for longer than others. You can confirm that with a good audiologist or univeristy with a specialist department. I have been extremely fortunate on both counts thus far, but with that in mind, I am also careful about both.
It seems to me you started this thread with the objective of 'proving' that most people are deaf above x frequency. This has been demonstrated to be inaccurate by several people, who have no difficulty hearing frequencies above the point you appear to believe possible. Since you were the one who set the (loose) test criteria insofar as you selected the site and test tones, and were presumably happy with their qualitative aspects, it's up to you now. You can carry on firing off frankly rather unimaginative insults, and continue believing that all swans are white. Or, as Carl Sagan said of Johannes Kepler,
'When Kepler found his long-cherished beliefs did not agree with the most precise observation, he accepted the uncomfortable fact. He preferred the hard truth to his dearest illusions. That is the heart of science.'
I have thanks. Last time was ~6 months ago in a friend's home studio. Lynn Olson Ariels with Scan Speak D2905/9500 tweeters. Same result.
News to me. I am aware of some studies that showed significant HF loss in teenagers who have been regularly exposed to high SPLs for prolonged periods. No surprise there. Not all teenagers are though.
Hardly. People differ as do environmental factors. Some are fortunate enough to retain their HF hearing for longer than others, in the same way that some retain certain aspects of their vision for longer than others. You can confirm that with a good audiologist or univeristy with a specialist department. I have been extremely fortunate on both counts thus far, but with that in mind, I am also careful about both.
It seems to me you started this thread with the objective of 'proving' that most people are deaf above x frequency. This has been demonstrated to be inaccurate by several people, who have no difficulty hearing frequencies above the point you appear to believe possible. Since you were the one who set the (loose) test criteria insofar as you selected the site and test tones, and were presumably happy with their qualitative aspects, it's up to you now. You can carry on firing off frankly rather unimaginative insults, and continue believing that all swans are white. Or, as Carl Sagan said of Johannes Kepler,
'When Kepler found his long-cherished beliefs did not agree with the most precise observation, he accepted the uncomfortable fact. He preferred the hard truth to his dearest illusions. That is the heart of science.'
Last edited:
Yeah yeah. It is possible though that not being able to hear some these harmonics might actually sound better. Just because you can see a fat naked girl doesn't mean you want to see it. By the same token just because these harmonics are present (bloody obvious) doesn't necessarily mean they are pleasing to the ear. You might be better off not hearing them. 
'Got a file not found error but I should be doing this in the "BIB room" anyway. Elsewhere I have test tone cd but forget how high it goes-- that was the one Zilla recommended some time back transferred to a cd.
My bandwidth may be too tied up to try right now. But it raises a question I have had since my first kit build: is that rubbish heard in a tweeter only useful to anyone at all?
My bandwidth may be too tied up to try right now. But it raises a question I have had since my first kit build: is that rubbish heard in a tweeter only useful to anyone at all?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.