Last edited:
Both. What is most optimistic Tr of signal and then be 5-10 times faster sampling.
-Richard
Hi Bill,
You may find this interesting to read.
Human hearing beats the Fourier uncertainty principle
Hans
OMG That is EXACTLY what I am talking about. And only CD 16/44.1
This other stuff you mention and Scott and Waly mention is not on point at all. All true but not directed to what i or JN has told in our own individual ways.
THx-RNMarsh
Yes very interesting.
And i'm very happy to see it confort my certainty that our hearing system is highly dependant of our culture. The best performing subject was a musician. As there is no reason he have better performing ears (the microphone) his results depends of his education (brain) and on what he focus.
We are all entitled to each own opinion and it should be just that, opinion. As for your repeated attempt to back up your opinion with more of your opinion, reactions to it from others are unavoidable. IOW, you are setting yourself up for it.
I have not seen capacitors discussed lately, when did you ask?. You probably also forgot the discussion of ideal vs perfect.
T, I stand corrected. I did not work directly with Ampex when they finally put out the ATR-100, so I just assumed that they moved up to 2 mil lam heads as I told them to do in 1968. I have never used ceramic heads, but I was told that they did have problems like you described. I had custom 2 mil lam heads made for my modifications to the Studers that I used. No real problems with them, so far as I know. The standard thickness for the head laminations when I worked at Ampex was 6 mils. It was not enough for best performance.
Interesting. I think, the knowledge about hearing ability is prefect. Maybe it perfect for average people or old man.
So, it is confirm to JC's opinion about importance of timing.
In my opinion that paper makes it certain we *should* do better than CD quality, but not much more BW/risetime is required, 16/32Khz would be enough, it is a pity that the inventors were fixated on Beethovens's 9th fitting on the disc.
Maybe, just maybe, we should listen first and then figure out the engineering to fit what we can hear instead of the other way around? Anyway, that is what i do.
Listen first and test second. Then find solutions. Listen again. Retest. Relisten. etc.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
-3dB at 40KHz. Minimum. or 44Khz.
24b/96K+ is fine as a more suitable minimum, though. Which we have already for a long time.
If one loves disks, over computer files, get a CD recorder like this one and burn to 16/44 and burn another at 24/95 direct. Red Book and CD24.
Alesis ML-9600 High Resolution Masterlink Master CD Recorder (yes, I also have one).
But, then try the 5 times rule at about 24/192+
Thx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I find it intriguing what people can extract from this document and why 44.1/16 should not be adequate.
We humans seem to have some 4000 inner hair cells, each individually capable of hearing a certain frequency.
At the same time all nerves coming from those hair cells are not only individually processed, but also fed in one separate nerve cell through a kind of AND gate.
This gating mechanism seems responsible for hearing of rapid sound attacks instead of frequencies, but still within the frequency range that our hearing system (hairs cells) supports.
This implies that we have different mechanisms for the frequency and the time domain.
That is why we are so sensitive to the onset and decay of the sound of an instrument.
An elderly person, who lost the upper octave of his hearing range from 9khz to 18kHz, still has 3600 inner hair cells.
It has been investigated that the temporal resolution decreases with the square root of the amount of inner hair cells, so temporal resolution for an elderly person increases only by 5%.
So frequency wise, he is somewhat crippled, but because of still being very sensitive to hearing the onset and decay of a specific instrument, he is still very well able to tell the difference from one audio system to another.
But again, there is no reason to reject 44.1/16.
Hans
We humans seem to have some 4000 inner hair cells, each individually capable of hearing a certain frequency.
At the same time all nerves coming from those hair cells are not only individually processed, but also fed in one separate nerve cell through a kind of AND gate.
This gating mechanism seems responsible for hearing of rapid sound attacks instead of frequencies, but still within the frequency range that our hearing system (hairs cells) supports.
This implies that we have different mechanisms for the frequency and the time domain.
That is why we are so sensitive to the onset and decay of the sound of an instrument.
An elderly person, who lost the upper octave of his hearing range from 9khz to 18kHz, still has 3600 inner hair cells.
It has been investigated that the temporal resolution decreases with the square root of the amount of inner hair cells, so temporal resolution for an elderly person increases only by 5%.
So frequency wise, he is somewhat crippled, but because of still being very sensitive to hearing the onset and decay of a specific instrument, he is still very well able to tell the difference from one audio system to another.
But again, there is no reason to reject 44.1/16.
Hans
Look at the graph, I am assuming that the nyquist limit corresponds to 20Khz behaviour, it seems that the content above 20kHz, whilst is can be noticed when very high ( in same room as Ultrasonic tanks makes ears ring/hurt) it is not needed to enjoy music, but it seems the timing information is much tighter than that indicates, hence more BW to preserve that. with the exact numbers of their data it would be possible to come up with a more accurate number, but that was just an estimate on my part, hence calling it an opinion, not a fact.
look at the extreme data points, 3Hz resolution, with 3mS of data, and 18mS for 0.1Hz difference, absolutely nuts that ears/brains can do so well!
Uhmmm....only if that change in amplitude would require a sinusiodal component above Nyquist. It would be imperceptible anyways because of limitations in HF hearing and will be filtered out by any adequate ADC.
Don't know if I would qualify for hanging, but it so happens that your 'truth' oftentimes is not shared by others, and I am one of them.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.