According to a sales representative of some audio business, not enough money has been spent on studies of what people hear and therefore we cannot rule out the audibility claims of DACs made by him and others.How many studies and subjects were there, and do they represent all 7.5 billion people on Earth?
Music sure can, but you aren't talking about the reproduction of it.Well, music serves many different purposes for different people and occasions. Pleasant to some can be irritating to others. I can't stand the way some kids enjoy their music.
All I've seen were quite rude response curves especially in the 1991 convention paper; I have to look if some additional information was available. Despite the quite steep filters used (96 or 170dB/oct) some kind of interference will have taken place.
Not sure, what that means as it was presumably active but not getting a signal in the lowpass filtered case?!
Usually a partly activated system (as in this example) would be considered as a benefit, but not as a disadvantage. Risk of additional IM products is surely reduced in this variant.
Do you assume that it could introduce variables in favour of the audibility of ultrasonics?
Sure, if the experiments allows for a full range speaker (covering the audioband and the ultrasonic range up to 60 - 100 kHz) and such a system is available while avoiding the interference and the amplifiere IMD risc, it would be great.
Otoh the argument why the setup used should be considered as "unscientific" and unreliable is missing.
As you brought up recently the difficulties when digitally manipulating the 1Bit data, it could be the reason why they used the setup as described.
EH, playback of recorded music is a form of reproduction and not all playback is meant to achieve high degree of faithfulness to the original. IIRC, both Pavel and T have stated current state of achievement has not managed music reproduction to be indistinguishable from the original event.
As you know, we basically agree wrt the human nature, but I still think that this is a quite surprising example.
Basically it is an attempt to gain more infomation about what is happening; the empirical psychoacoustical experiment still uses the expressed (so most likely the conscious) opinion of the listener. Using this kind of imaging (even more extreme if using fMRI) can be kind of more objective evaluation of the listeners response to stimuli.
Additional information isn't worth the effort?
Despite Scheffé's treatment of multiple comparisons it still could be a result of random guessing, but real changes in EEGs or PET-Scans could provide more corrobation for real effects.
AFAIR the experimenters did baseline experiments to enhance the ability to distinguish real from side effects......
Are you really so strongly against any new approach to get more information about what is really going on, or am I mistaken?
I addressed that one in my last response.
Original what, electric signal, sound waves or something else?
That depends on the sound. There have been demonstrations of live vs recorded sound decades ago. You can try it yourself but if you do, just don't do it the way RN Marsh did.
Have you read it? I scanned it. What do you think the subjects meant by "pleasant"?
Frequencies of Inaudible High-Frequency Sounds Differentially Affect Brain Activity: Positive and Negative Hypersonic Effects
Frequencies of Inaudible High-Frequency Sounds Differentially Affect Brain Activity: Positive and Negative Hypersonic Effects
Last edited:
I guess:
Enjoyable
pleasing
pleasurable
nice
agreeable
satisfying
gratifying
welcome
good
acceptable
to one's liking
entertaining
amusing
diverting
delightful
charming
inviting
attractive
beautiful
fine
balmy
salubrious
bonny
couthy
lovely
great
neat
lekker
mooi
;-)
The scientific part is HF contents do have an influence. On this I don't have enough scientific arguments to deny.
The subjective note is "more pleasant", that I can verify by myself and for myself if, one day, I'm curious enough.
But, as I said 24-96 being there, I can make the economy of such an experiment if I'm satisfied enough.
I do not exclude that the participants find it more pleasant to feel more brilliance (or the opposite), while, for my part, I like that there is more naturalness.
Last edited:
I saw 54 Nude Honeys in Birmingham, they weren't "pleasant"
It's subjective.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.