As in many things our own hubris & arrogance of our inate abilities, rears its ugly head. The common dog hears far better than we imagine, they even have independently variable organic horns built-in to their "microphones". We are a comparison low-grade-moron in this respective capability. But us humans have machines, we can peer across the universe. These machines can tell us exactly just how utterly poor our hearing actually is, but this arrogance, doesn't allow us to "listen" to the inevitable conclusion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick.......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick.......
Thread split from - Ak4499 noise at iv opamp output
There are no specific hard limits of audibility. Existing published limits of audibility are estimates of the average limit of audibility for a population. That mean 50% of people are estimated to be able to hear below the limit, and 50% of people are estimated to not be able to hear below the limit.
Having done some actual testing in this area, I can say that there absolutely is a limit of audibility. The test I was doing at the time was this: running sweeps through a speaker, at decreasing SPLs. The purpose of the test was to see if speakers do anything weird at very low levels, and I used a very sensitive microphone to test this. I also sat and listened to the sweeps, and noted the equal loudness contours in full effect: as things got quiet, I heard less and less of the sweep - just the bit in the 1-6kHz range. The next set of sweeps were just small blips in the 4kHz range - I simply did not hear the rest of the sweep, and it was only as the frequency passed through the most sensitive part of my hearing that I heard anything at all.
For the final sweep, I heard nothing.
In all cases, the microphone picked up the speaker just fine, and the frequency response stayed consistent.
It will probably vary according to a whole bunch of factors, but the fact is this: neurons have the equivalent of a gate built-in. Below a certain excitation, no signal is passed. No signal passed means your eardrum might vibrate in sympathy with the air pressure, but your brain will never ever know.
Chris
Two more considerations about limits of hearing (or maybe better: sensing - in general):
The shepherd tone (Binaural Shepard Tone Generator • The Audio Illusion)
You have no control what tone you follow neither the moment of 'shift'.
Mixing of two tones results in super- and subsonic products. Say 2kHz and 3kHz yields a sub of 1kHz and a super of 6kHz (and more harmonics). These can happen mid air and also with headphones mid brain. One key of a grand piano has three strings, all slightly apart, making a 'single' tone in our hearing. Could one hear a subsonic tone of 1kHz if two tones of 30kHz and 31kHz are produced at 'loud enough' spl?
The shepherd tone (Binaural Shepard Tone Generator • The Audio Illusion)
You have no control what tone you follow neither the moment of 'shift'.
Mixing of two tones results in super- and subsonic products. Say 2kHz and 3kHz yields a sub of 1kHz and a super of 6kHz (and more harmonics). These can happen mid air and also with headphones mid brain. One key of a grand piano has three strings, all slightly apart, making a 'single' tone in our hearing. Could one hear a subsonic tone of 1kHz if two tones of 30kHz and 31kHz are produced at 'loud enough' spl?
+1000
Comparing the sound different is same as comparing visual different. If we can determine which is the different, second attempt will more faster then first attempt. In double blind test, we should learning first to find the different.
The most sensible sounding explanation about this whole audibility thing I’ve read. You work for Wilson-Bensch by any chance?
Audiometry Test, Hearing Test | Mayfield Brain & Spine
In this hearing test, I was able to hear until 19kHz, one of my friend can hear 20kHz, but other only can hear 13kHz.
In this hearing test, I was able to hear until 19kHz, one of my friend can hear 20kHz, but other only can hear 13kHz.
When I said 'there is no specific hard limit' of audibility what I meant was that perceptual scientists have done little if any work in that area to pin down an exact number that applies to the best listener of all humans in the world today. That would be very difficult to do and not all that useful for most purposes. As a practical matter what can be done on more limited research budgets is study a much smaller group of people and find an average value for the group, then try to estimate how likely that group is to represent the world's population. Its not easy, but its doable, and at least it gives some kind of a number that is probably better than no number.
When it comes down to specific people, my feeling it that limits of audibility are likely to vary quite a bit depending on how it is measured. If it was for example measured by sorting opamp distortion then I might score better than most. If it is measured by hearing 20kHz tones at low SPL then I would probably score much worse. What that tells me is that measuring one way does not necessarily produce a result that applies to a very different situation. To put it another way, IMO hearing is probably nonlinear in ways most of us hardly imagine (particularly in situations where brain processing dominates the results).
When it comes down to specific people, my feeling it that limits of audibility are likely to vary quite a bit depending on how it is measured. If it was for example measured by sorting opamp distortion then I might score better than most. If it is measured by hearing 20kHz tones at low SPL then I would probably score much worse. What that tells me is that measuring one way does not necessarily produce a result that applies to a very different situation. To put it another way, IMO hearing is probably nonlinear in ways most of us hardly imagine (particularly in situations where brain processing dominates the results).
Last edited:
There is a single reason that we should believe our limits of audibility is infinity.
Human cognition system is NOT static like electronic measuring instruments, and this is why scientists do double blind test. Our perception is fragile and so easy to be biased.
The cognition system of the objectivist here who is spreading a dogma, "we can't hear anything that we can't measure" is totally biased by his dogma. So on ABX test, his ideas surely prevent him to hear any differences that he might hear if he does not have these ideas. Then his own ABX results keep confirming his possibly wrong ideas are correct. A negative spiral.
Be open minded.
Human cognition system is NOT static like electronic measuring instruments, and this is why scientists do double blind test. Our perception is fragile and so easy to be biased.
The cognition system of the objectivist here who is spreading a dogma, "we can't hear anything that we can't measure" is totally biased by his dogma. So on ABX test, his ideas surely prevent him to hear any differences that he might hear if he does not have these ideas. Then his own ABX results keep confirming his possibly wrong ideas are correct. A negative spiral.
Be open minded.
Last edited:
^ But not so much your brains leak out.
Be careful with the analogy you make, as basically everything you wrote about ABX is why there is an ABX protocol. I.e. your analogy is fundamentally wrong. There are a lot of limitations to the protocol (or other DBT's) but we have to ride somewhere along the sensitivity vs specificity curve.
Be careful with the analogy you make, as basically everything you wrote about ABX is why there is an ABX protocol. I.e. your analogy is fundamentally wrong. There are a lot of limitations to the protocol (or other DBT's) but we have to ride somewhere along the sensitivity vs specificity curve.
"...we should believe our limits of audibility is infinity"...the limits of delusion are vast, the limits of mythos are vast...the essence of "believe" is vast...so much so an entire array of "story-telling", Fiction, has blanketed the human condition, so much so as to encumber our human progress for uncounted centuries.
Believe what you will, when you claim to hear RF, after the laughing has ceased, someone will measure it...but you will now doubt claim, the "test" is tainted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick......
Believe what you will, when you claim to hear RF, after the laughing has ceased, someone will measure it...but you will now doubt claim, the "test" is tainted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick......
Single if you leave out the marketing ploy.
Or rebut with I still "heard" it and therefore the measurement is inadequate. Either that or There hasn't been enough money spent on human hearing studies and therefore it can't be a done deal.
>There hasn't been enough money spent on human hearing studies and therefore it can't be a done deal.
I wouldn't call all of them ghetto science, but sadly many of them seem to be. Then the results of "studies" have been used as marketing ploy. Do you remember 80's Japanese catalog?
In fact, this is only happening in audiophile world, in professional recording world, everything is subjective and they still love vintage equipments whatever the AES papers say. Only amateurs and prosumers care the measurements. In my impression, the main reason why some people in audiophile world want to trust the measurement is, they simply can't trust their ears, sorry.
I wouldn't call all of them ghetto science, but sadly many of them seem to be. Then the results of "studies" have been used as marketing ploy. Do you remember 80's Japanese catalog?
In fact, this is only happening in audiophile world, in professional recording world, everything is subjective and they still love vintage equipments whatever the AES papers say. Only amateurs and prosumers care the measurements. In my impression, the main reason why some people in audiophile world want to trust the measurement is, they simply can't trust their ears, sorry.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.