[kiteki]

 
I wasn't even looking for this, I wasn't even reading anything audio related... I was just reading the news, about terrorists I think... and then this article popped up:
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/9565041.stm
 
 
quote
 
"Manufacturers have produced so-called "super-tweeters", which work beyond the frequencies audible to the human ear.
"When the tweeters are played alone, one can barely, if at all, hear a thing," explains high end manufacturer Townshend Audio's specification sheet.
"Remarkably, however, all listeners... experience the same enhancement when the super-tweeters are engaged, describing the sound of their hi-fi systems as more natural and comfortable to listen to."
The rationale behind it is that recreating the whole spectrum of sound means that it will interact with its surroundings more naturally. It is said to have the most dramatic effect on vinyl LPs and on Blu-Ray discs, both of which capture more of the audio spectrum than a regular CD.
The device alone costs £800 ($1,300) but is expected to be integrated into high end headphones in the future."
 
 

 

[gregorio]

The rationale behind it is that recreating the whole spectrum of sound means that it will interact with its surroundings more naturally. It is said to have the most dramatic effect on vinyl LPs and on Blu-Ray discs, both of which capture more of the audio spectrum than a regular CD.

Oh dear, so the rational behind the product is based on a complete fallacy. The whole spectrum of sound cannot be recorded, encoded or replayed, so what are these "super-tweeter" reproducing? Certainly nothing from the recording.

Oh, and LPs capture less of the audio spectrum than CD and so does Blu-Ray (when encoded with Dolby Digital). So whatever dramatic effect it has is nothing to do with ultrasonic frequencies. Note they say "it is said to have". Presumably this is to protect them from law suits and claims of false marketing.

I'm sure if I search around I can find loads of bogus products at ridiculous prices, the audiophile world is packed full of it. Anyone fancy a $5,000 power cable? Just because something is marketed to audiophiles as having an effect does not prove that effect exists or is perceivable.

G

 

[kiteki]

 
It's easy to test and discard audiophile USB or HDMI cables, it's not as easy to dismiss hypersonic content since it actually exists and can be measured and it's being cut off and thrown away.
 
Blu-Ray has much more space than a CD so it allows for more information and the audio quality (in movies) is higher than on DVD's, I don't think Blu-Ray audio has picked up, but it has potential.
 
Off-topic but I want to buy music in BLU-RAY MINIDISCS, yes MD with a CARTRIDGE around the disc to PROTECT IT minimize PHYSICAL SPACE and still have the storage data of an odd 10GB (in single layer format).

 

[gregorio]

It's easy to test and discard audiophile USB or HDMI cables, it's not as easy to dismiss hypersonic content since it actually exists and can be measured and it's being cut off and thrown away.

It's the same basic principal. We measure cables and they all have differences, the problem is that those differences are not perceivable. Save as ultrasonic frequencies, we can measure them but they are not perceivable. Instruments produce virtually no energy above 22kHz, none of the standard studio mics record above about 20kHz and even if all this wasn't true, your ear will cut if off an throw it away anyway! You are not stating a fact when you say that hypersonic effect can be measured, you have no reliable evidence for hypersonic effect ever being measured or even existing.

You seem to have got it into your head that hypersonic effect is actually real and no amount of facts or scientific evidence is going to change your mind.

Blu-Ray has much more space than a CD so it allows for more information and the audio quality (in movies) is higher than on DVD's.

More information beyond what CD provides does not allow for higher audio quality! The vast majority of movies (both DVD and Blu-Ray) are encoded in Dolby Digital which is lower quality than CD. Having more storage space on Blu-Ray is irrelevant to audio quality unless a different audio format is employed.

Kiteki, you have some very strange ideas about how sound and digital audio works.

G

 

[kiteki]

 
I have already linked to measured hypersonic data above 20kHz in this thread, here is the link for you again http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm
 
 
It's a common known fact that blu-ray movies use lossless audio which is of higher quality than the compressed audio which you'll find in older movie formats.
 
The fact that blu-ray has more storage space than CD's has opened up the path to audio-specifc blu-ray's with higher audio quality than CD's, here is one such example: http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Nordic-Sound-2L-Audiophile-Reference-Recordings-Blu-ray/5296/
 
 
USB and HDMI audiophile cables are not the same principal at all, they're sending 1's and 0's down a cable, they do not have differences, they are basically the same and they are not cutting off any data.

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote:

 

More information beyond what CD provides does not allow for higher audio quality! (?) The vast majority of movies (both DVD and Blu-Ray) are encoded in Dolby Digital which is lower quality than CD. Having more storage space on Blu-Ray is irrelevant to audio quality unless a different audio format is employed.

Kiteki, you have some very strange ideas about how sound and digital audio works.

G
 

So, you're saying this is lower quality than a CD, is that what you're saying?
 

 
 

 

[gregorio]

So, you're saying this is lower quality than a CD, is that what you're saying?
 

The Dolby Digital 5.1 is lower quality, it's a highly compressed format. The uncompressed 24/48 is equivalent to CD.

G

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I think you're referring to the AC3 codec used for DVDs... now-a-days, DD offers lossless compression for hi-def formats (Dolby TrueHD I think it's called).

 

[kiteki]

G... really.
 
K... then.

 

[kiteki]

 
You know what G I'm on the fence about this whole hypersonic thing but I think maybe that new super-tweeter might be enough to convince me more into the correct direction.
 
It's pretty cheap so nothing lost but what I need is a headphone jack that will transmit those frequencies and that seems to be a problem...
 
 

 

[gregorio]

 
I have already linked to measured hypersonic data above 20kHz in this thread, here is the link for you again http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm
 
 
It's a common known fact that blu-ray movies use lossless audio which is of higher quality than the compressed audio which you'll find in older movie formats.
 
The fact that blu-ray has more storage space than CD's has opened up the path to audio-specifc blu-ray's with higher audio quality than CD's, here is one such example: http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Nordic-Sound-2L-Audiophile-Reference-Recordings-Blu-ray/5296/
 
 
USB and HDMI audiophile cables are not the same principal at all, they're sending 1's and 0's down a cable, they do not have differences, they are basically the same and they are not cutting off any data.

The cables themselves have measurable differences, can you hear those differences, no. Same principle. The boyk paper shows that instruments have some energy above 20kHz. The violin for example has 0.04% of it's energy beyond 20kHz, can you hear that 0.04%, NO! You must have read a different Boyk paper than the one you linked to because the only evidence which Boyk provides for hypersonic effect is the Oohashi paper, which was later discredited.

Your link to the Nordic Sound web page lists the audio as 24/192 format! You think 24/192 is better than CD audio quality, why? Because it says "audiophile reference quality"? 24/192 is not higher quality than CD.

You know what G I'm on the fence about this whole hypersonic thing but I think maybe that new super-tweeter might be enough to convince me more into the correct direction.
 
It's pretty cheap so nothing lost but what I need is a headphone jack that will transmit those frequencies and that seems to be a problem...

I would say it's up to you what to believe but apparently it's up to the marketing hype. A little sad but it's your money.

I think you're referring to the AC3 codec used for DVDs... now-a-days, DD offers lossless compression for hi-def formats (Dolby TrueHD I think it's called).

Yes, you are correct, Dolby TrueHD should sound better than DD (on a high quality system) but would not provide a higher audio quality than CD.

G

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

Kiteki, others (as you wish), here's another viewpoint of the Super Tweeter (ultra sonics) thingy. http://www.blackdahlia.com/html/tip_48.html. Even a nuclear engineer was skeptical at first. 
 
This is part of the reason that I don't like black and white discussions like these is that it puts discovery and curiosity on the shelf. It's one thing to use science to prove something, but science is usually built on discovery and investigation. That's why quotes like, "If it measures good and sounds bad, -- it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, -- you've measured the wrong thing." (Daniel von Recklinghausen) make a lot of sense, at least to me. 
 
 
Quote:

 
You know what G I'm on the fence about this whole hypersonic thing but I think maybe that new super-tweeter might be enough to convince me more into the correct direction.
 
It's pretty cheap so nothing lost but what I need is a headphone jack that will transmit those frequencies and that seems to be a problem...
 
 

 

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote:

 

The cables themselves have measurable differences, can you hear those differences, no. Same principle. The boyk paper shows that instruments have some energy above 20kHz. The violin for example has 0.04% of it's energy beyond 20kHz, can you hear that 0.04%, NO! You must have read a different Boyk paper than the one you linked to because the only evidence which Boyk provides for hypersonic effect is the Oohashi paper, which was later discredited.

 

 
As discussed earlier in this thread the Oohashi paper hasn't been discredited properly and that is a problem, at least for onlookers that aren't partial to either side and are willing to dig in the documents a little bit rather than gloss over a couple sentences on wikipedia.
 
Once I researched a myth called Polybius for let's say a dozen hours of reading, then I told a couple friends about it, so what do they do? They look it up on google, read a couple sentences on snopes.com I think it was saying it never existed, then they say "NOPE IT'S FAKE" well that's fine if a couple sentences is enough for people but I'm not going to give their opinion any credit and I take it that's what the vast majority have done on the hypersonic effect as well.
 
Lol you are right 0.04% of the sound of a Violin shouldn't matter, and I probably shouldn't care about what I can't hear with my ears right? It's like having lightbulbs in my house that are infra-red and ultra-violet what kind of a nutjob would do that to his house just a waste of electricity if you ask me.
 
By the way the Boyk article you just read also states that a cymbal crash has 40% (40.00) of it's energy above 20kHz. (that is a lot don't you think)
 
 
 
Quote:

 

Your link to the Nordic Sound web page lists the audio as 24/192 format! You think 24/192 is better than CD audio quality, why? Because it says "audiophile reference quality"? 24/192 is not higher quality than CD.

 

How is 24/192 not better than CD quality??
 
 
Quote:

 

I would say it's up to you what to believe but apparently it's up to the marketing hype. A little sad but it's your money.
 

 
So can you show me a piece of "marketing" about the hypersonic effect? Preferrably within the last 10 years.
 
And yeah $30 for a piece of Hi-Fi equipment is so expensive and mass marketed, like, you go girl (BRB I'm just synchronizing iTunes to my overpriced made in China POS to listen to some $200 chinese earphones with $2 plastic housings hold on a sec "but it sounds so transparent after burn in!!!")

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Quote:

Yes, you are correct, Dolby TrueHD should sound better than DD (on a high quality system) but would not provide a higher audio quality than CD.

 
The majority of titles are encoded @ 16/48 with some being 24/48... so they have a little bit of an edge vs redbook. Though this is just technicalities, and in practice the higher rates offer no perceivable difference I'd wager.
 

 

[kiteki]

Okay let's all agree blu-ray is no better than CD's but I was talking about movies and comparing to DVD's actually.
 
Gregorio is obsessed that 20Hz~20kHz 16/44 is all we'll ever need for our human ears.