[Inks]

Quote:

the MDR EX600 has already been released in japan roughly around 300 USD but they don't ship internationally o.O any jap members keen to try them out?

 
http://translate.google.com.au/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://www.amazon.co.jp/%25E3%2582%25BD%25E3%2583%258B%25E3%2583%25BC-MDR-EX600-SONY-%25E5%25AF%2586%25E9%2596%2589%25E5%259E%258B%25E3%2582%25A4%25E3%2583%25B3%25E3%2583%258A%25E3%2583%25BC%25E3%2582%25A4%25E3%2583%25A4%25E3%2583%25BC%25E3%2583%25AC%25E3%2582%25B7%25E3%2583%25BC%25E3%2583%2590%25E3%2583%25BC-EX600/dp/B00420UAPE&ei=SqHFTJ2LOsWycNzliM0N&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBsQ7gEwAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmdr%2Bex600%2Bamazon%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1332%26bih%3D565

Well it's also available  for us, you just have to use a forwarding service. I heard Tenso is highly recommended at an addition 20-30$ of the price.
 

 

[matto]

Hmm actually in Australia though I'll wait for some peoples opinions first

 

[svyr]

is the ex600 also going to use the same driver tech as the higher end model iems they plan to release?

 

[svyr]

what I do know is that the human ear and brain is probably more complex than any measuring instruments we currently possess.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypersonic_effect

also, same page as you linked to above

In September 2007, two members of the Boston Audio Society and the Audio Engineering Society published their study in which about half of the 554 double-blind ABX test listening trials made by 60 respondents showed the correct identification of high-resolution or CD-standard sampling rate.[6] The results were no better than flipping a coin.[6]

also, the anti-alias filter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog-to-digital_converter) makes it pretty non-applicable to digital audio

When sampling audio signals at 44.1 kHz, the anti-aliasing filter should have eliminated all frequencies above 22 kHz. The input frequency (in this case, 22 kHz),

Most CDs have a cut-off at 20 or 22, and if not, most DACs will have a filter that cuts off at 22k.

Also, anything above 15khz in recordings is usually max 6-10db above the noise floor and either masked by lower frequencies or we just plain don't hear, since it's too quiet vs 40-50 db of 'the rest' (just plot your fav CD's spectrogram - here's a bad example of a classical music cd that's particularly well miked for pno http://www.head-fi.org/image/id/616410 )

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypersonic_effect

  Numerous other scientific studies have contradicted these results, finding that people who have "good ears"^{[size=x-small][6][/size]} listening to Super Audio CDs and high resolution DVD-Audio recordings^{[size=x-small][7][/size]} on high fidelity systems capable of reproducing sounds up to 30 kHz^{[size=x-small][8][/size]} can't tell the difference between high resolution audio and the normal CD sampling rate of 44.1 kHz.^{[size=x-small][6][/size][size=x-small][9][/size]}

 
Eh?
 
The other day I showed my housemate who's not into audio my SACD player setup, he's never used anything above apple earbuds.  I played a CD to him and then an SACD, he picked the SACD no problem and described the difference in sound very well.
 
16/44 versus 24/192, it's not difficult to tell the difference, I'm not being an audio snob, I'm just stating the facts that 24/192 sounds good and doesn't require hypersonic endorphins or special training to hear the difference.
 

 

[svyr]

 
Quote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypersonic_effect

  Numerous other scientific studies have contradicted these results, finding that people who have "good ears"^{[size=x-small][6][/size]} listening to Super Audio CDs and high resolution DVD-Audio recordings^{[size=x-small][7][/size]} on high fidelity systems capable of reproducing sounds up to 30 kHz^{[size=x-small][8][/size]} can't tell the difference between high resolution audio and the normal CD sampling rate of 44.1 kHz.^{[size=x-small][6][/size][size=x-small][9][/size]}

 
Eh?
 
The other day I showed my housemate who's not into audio my SACD player setup, he's never used anything above apple earbuds.  I played a CD to him and then an SACD, he picked the SACD no problem and described the difference in sound very well.
 
16/44 versus 24/192, it's not difficult to tell the difference, I'm not being an audio snob, I'm just stating the facts that 24/192 sounds good and doesn't require hypersonic endorphins or special training to hear the difference.
 

comparing different sources/different mastering (presumably the CD and SACD wouldn't be the same mastering or even artist/album) is not the same as comparing two files from the same production: one - 24/192k (original) and the same file downsampled to 16/44k (which is what the talk would be about if you wanted to test for people telling apart 16b44k vs higher sr/bd).

Furthermore, SACD doesn't automatically = good mastering or higher effective FR anywhere near infrasonic or at audible ranges if not filtered (e.g. MD&G SACDs of christian zacharias's recordings - ironically still the above http://assets.head-fi.org/2/24/24194694_pno_orch_22conc_zach.jpg lol...unless their SACD layer is dramatically and magically better)

i.e. chances are he wasn't hearing the hypersonic effect.

 

[kiteki]

Oh I don't think he was hearing the hypersonic effect, unless Celine Dion's voice can really go that high.
 
He wanted to hear "My heart will go on" from Titanic.  Lol.
 
 

 

[Andrew H]

Of course you want a transducer that can do 30khz. The good headphones (stats and orthos) go higher than that.
 
A Kia Rio can go 103mph. A Bugatti Veyron can do 267. Which car is going to do a better job of cruising the open interstate at 90mph?

 

[svyr]

Of course you want a transducer that can do 30khz. The good headphones (stats and orthos) go higher than that.
 

and most BA, DBA and 3ple BA iems actually state a honest FR, not a -50db FR which is usually about 20hz-17|18khz... Very flawed argument there, since everytime someone quote a FR of 30-50-90khz, you can bet it's at -30-50db .
Plus, if they misstate the high FR by going 10db lower and not quoting it (for free for them) and all the other figures are crap for the HP it'd still be very much bad (in particular distortion figures or pear shaped fr graph).

 

[kiteki]

Yeah I don't quite believe my SA5000's are still at 0dB when they reach 90kHz or higher otherwise bats should be outside my window.
 
They are stated as 5Hz ~ 100kHz

 

[svyr]

Yeah I don't quite believe my SA5000's are still at 0dB when they reach 90kHz or higher otherwise bats should be outside my window.
 
They are stated as 5Hz ~ 100kHz

lol@sony and 5hz-100khz, aside from HP FR at 90khz, the actual signal level on SACD of -50db at 90khz (wild guess here, probably even less, none of my 96k24b recordings even go over -60db at 40khz) = not audible at all probably even to bats. especially outside the window. amusing thought though...

 

[MaxwellDemon]

I got the chance to preview these ex1000... boy, they are really expensive. I am not sure if they are worth the price at the moment. Might write a short impression when I get back home.

 

[praetor47]

Quote:

 
A Kia Rio can go 103mph. A Bugatti Veyron can do 267. Which car is going to do a better job of cruising the open interstate at 90mph?

the kia obviously. it will consume less gas, pollute less, has room for more people although it's probably a bit less comfortable. veyron's only "advantage" (if you can call it that) in this scenario is the higher acceleration rate so it will take it probably a good 10-20s to reach that target speed. still, the end result will be the same (except for the veyron coming at the destination 20s sooner (although if it's far enough the kia will probably get there sooner since the veyron will have to stop for a refill quite often)

 

[ljokerl]

Quote:

the kia obviously. it will consume less gas, pollute less, has room for more people although it's probably a bit less comfortable. veyron's only "advantage" (if you can call it that) in this scenario is the higher acceleration rate so it will take it probably a good 10-20s to reach that target speed. still, the end result will be the same (except for the veyron coming at the destination 20s sooner (although if it's far enough the kia will probably get there sooner since the veyron will have to stop for a refill quite often)

 
I wouldn't be so sure about that (skip to 0:54 because timelinking is apparently disabled):
 

 
I thought it was a great analogy because trying to reach top speed in an economy car is a very unpleasant experience - the lack of performance headroom makes all the difference, just like with headphones.

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

Quote:

 
A Kia Rio can go 103mph. A Bugatti Veyron can do 267. Which car is going to do a better job of cruising the open interstate at 90mph?

the kia obviously. it will consume less gas, pollute less, has room for more people although it's probably a bit less comfortable. veyron's only "advantage" (if you can call it that) in this scenario is the higher acceleration rate so it will take it probably a good 10-20s to reach that target speed. still, the end result will be the same (except for the veyron coming at the destination 20s sooner (although if it's far enough the kia will probably get there sooner since the veyron will have to stop for a refill quite often)

Easy.  The Veyron.  Greater mass means more stability and comfort.  Better suspension tuning and damping.  Leather, suede and wood interior materials w/ better insulation, climate control and superior sound system.  No brainer for me.  The Rio probably starts shuddering @ 85 due to poor caster and SAI settings coupled w/ crappy thin OEM tires that are barely round from factory.  You'll hear every niggle inside and out and will be lucky to get 20 MPG or more cruising @ 90 all the time.  Plus, since the Rio is cheap and so accessible it would actually cause more pollution and damage to the environment in an overall sense.  

  So which car is the Sony again?