I was just making a joke. Sorry, did not want to offend anyone.
It is also a way to show some scepsis with respect to claims of there being some 5% group with special hearing abilities.
So if I was in the top 1/5 of the 5 percentile I’d see some love 😀
It’s all good vac, no offense taken......I guess my subtle retort was lost in translation. 😛
Nobody is claiming that anyone is 'special.' Everyone hears differently, just like some people have may have particularly acute 20-15 vision, or even 20-10. It may not seem fair, and or may not seem possible. However, we accept it as fact since it is easy to measure.
Listening skill in some respects can be easily measured too. In a music major transcription class, there may be a test to write the out notation for piece of music that is listened to. Some instruments may be masked by the frequencies of other instruments, but students are required to practice to overcome that difficulty.
Unfortunately, so far there are no EE audio design classes (that I know of) where students are required to learn to rank distortion of different versions of a recording by ear. However, as with the music majors, some distortion detection skill can be learned, and it may come more naturally to some students than others. Life is unfair, just the way it is.
And by the way, you are smart guy. In the top 5% maybe. Maybe more special than that. Is it unfair to claim some people like you exist?
Last edited:
Probably fewer than are young men?
I don't need to wear glasses to read or to drive, but my vision is not as good as it once was.
I can't hear high frequencies anymore, but I can hear distortion in the frequencies I can still hear. No question though, I am not as good at it as I once was.
How many aging music professors can still transcribe?
Last edited:
Without correction my vision is 20-200 and has been since age 7,
I’ve said this before and will mention it again now because it’s slightly relevant, I honestly believe the other senses ‘make up for’ or become more sensitive to compensate for the loss.
My hearing has always been exemplary and find my self more in tune with the sounds around me than most. I’m not saying I’m special by any means, but I find it interesting when someone says there’s no difference, and it’s night and day to me.
Maybe one of the skeptics could make up a couple different versions of the same song and post it up for us?
Or even pm it to me first for ‘sighted listening’ eval and then I’ll post my results.....that way there’s no innuendo to bias it.
I’ve said this before and will mention it again now because it’s slightly relevant, I honestly believe the other senses ‘make up for’ or become more sensitive to compensate for the loss.
My hearing has always been exemplary and find my self more in tune with the sounds around me than most. I’m not saying I’m special by any means, but I find it interesting when someone says there’s no difference, and it’s night and day to me.
Maybe one of the skeptics could make up a couple different versions of the same song and post it up for us?
Or even pm it to me first for ‘sighted listening’ eval and then I’ll post my results.....that way there’s no innuendo to bias it.
Last edited:
Test Dept have been around since the early eighties doing industrial music and this track is from their most recent album 2019 Disturbance and suggested as a test track ages back. This album is full of great production values interesting layerings and top sound quality and contains big natural sounds, like clanging metal sounds but natural sounds nonetheless and will show up flaws and powerful bass content to get the walls shaking. I have grown to quite like this stuff, it's good fun up properly loud with a system that does good low bass and if the loudspeakers are good, thanks for increasing my musical appreciation Scott W.
Yes and no......there are lots of industrial/metal sounds that can sound all wrong if a system is not right, so this record is useful as test/evaluation material and enjoyable too IMO, YMMV.
IMO I find this process can make reproduced sounds subjectively more accurate because of reduction of 'harshness' and better 3D imaging.
Ok, you picked the source track Test Dept as more realistic and the loopback recording Two Flames as more refined, Bob commented that he much preferred Two Flames, I'm not sure if you indicate preference.
That you have descriptions of differences is useful and is a data point, thank you for you time and your effort. Please send me a link to a good Gamelan recording, I would like hear some of the good stuff.
Dan.
Last edited:
A lot of response have been referred to as "attack" on this thread by small number of posters. It's subjected to the readers but perhaps the term is overused on this thread. Someone seeking clarification on vague statement by asking probing question isn't an attack. Expressing disagreement isn't an attack. However, the following quote is an example of personal attack.
In almost all cases, they are within the surveyed and published range of human hearing capacity which the audio electronics are designed around.
So what is your point? Are you saying that there are those that you know of who can hear beyond the surveyed and published range of human hearing capacity and they said the audio component x, y, z made audible difference in level matched double blind listening test therefore we shouldn't pass it off as BS or sales pitch when we see claims like DAC 'A' sounds better than DAC 'B'?
To be fair, Two Flames is more refined, meaning that for most people it is the preferred one. I'm just trying to see deeper 'between the lines' and speculate that if the music accuracy is critical I will prefer 'Test Dept'.
I have told you before, that the best thing you can get is similar to bybee, and JC has just mentioned that he didn't use it for his critical audio input, only for TV, and that's what I have guessed.
Also, I'm sure that if our system is so bad, we can benefit more from your effort. But if our system is good already, it can be a drawback, depends on taste and sensitivity to phase.
BTW, I don't have gamelan recordings. Only CDs. But I'm familiar with this music live. On my wedding day we have this gamelan music, which is a tradition for Javanese people (my wife).
You seem confused. I didn't say anyone could hear 'beyond' any particular published range of human hearing. Sean Olive suggested that some young people can hear perhaps up nearing 30kHz, but I didn't say it. Go complain to Olive if you don't like it, not me.
Last edited:
Cheers Simon, its been a while... Nice to see the Groundhog thread is still going...😀
The human scull changes in shape with age, thus near sight vision tends to improve - fact.
Historically, Japanese army archers (of a certain age) would lie down on the ground before battle with stone pebbles over their eyes to flatten the eyeballs for improved long distance vision - fact.
Only 1% of the population over the age of 75 have perfect 20-20 vision - fact.
tapestryofsound
Last edited:
Why would someone with near perfect uncorrected vision need to distort their eyes, and how long could anything like this last? Sounds more like a ritual/folklore kind of thing the world is full of these and many are spiritually wonderful.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.