[maricius]

  I'm 22 and my upper limit is 19kHz. I think you might have an advantage with the gear you are using

   
I'm using the Sony MH1, which is a bit too forgiving when it comes to voices. I will try the test again with different gear when I have the time.
I found the reverb questions to be straight forward, though. 

Maybe IEMs would pick it up easier. Hmm. Is there any audible music up at 19kHz? 

 

[Jon Sonne]

The sony MH1 I used are IEMs. I don't think so. 19 kHz is also very piercing and uncomfortable to listen to (so is 18 kHz imo). I wonder what 21 kHz must be like. @bob439 posted that his hearing cuts off at 21kHz.

 

[maricius]

  The sony MH1 I used are IEMs. I don't think so. 19 kHz is also very piercing and uncomfortable to listen to (so is 18 kHz imo). I wonder what 21 kHz must be like. @bob439 posted that his hearing cuts off at 21kHz.

Oh I meant to say maybe reverb is more noticeable on IEMs as soundstage is more compressed and possibly impacting the sound more.

 

[Jon Sonne]

That could be.
 
I know that high-hats can produce sounds above 21 kHz, but the majority of sounds produced by instruments are at frequencies below 5k 
 
Take a look at this one, if you are interested:
http://www.head-fi.org/a/frequency-response-of-headphones

 

[sonitus mirus]

   
My upper frequency hearing limit using an EQ'ed LCD-X is around 16,5 KHz. I could easily handle the 96 kbps, not so easily the 112 kbps and the 128 kbps was almost impossible. In the beginning I tried to listen for tremolo of the cymbals/whiskers. When that didn't pan out I then tried to focus on the sharpness of the bass pluckings. Also didn't work. Finally I tried focusing on the male vocal. It was difficult because the distance between the mic and the singer's head seemed to vary throughout the sample. Therefore I attempted to A/B using specific passages. In the end I chose the samples where the male vocal was ever so slightly softer, but I still feel like there was a not insignificant amount of sheer luck involved. Tired ears certainly didn't help.
 
I didn't notice much reverb in the vocal myself. I suspect the LCD-X isn't the best can for listening to reverb decay trails, as it's pretty well damped and doesn't enhance or prolong echoes in any way. I tried using the SE846 as well, but that was completely hopeless, as it doesn't have much output in the upper treble region.

 There are no fundamental frequencies with these musical samples that require hearing above 16.5 KHz.  Anything at that range or above is mostly masked from the lower frequencies anyway.  These are not pure test tones.
 
Sound frequency doubles with each octave.  The difference between 16.5 KHz and 20 KHz covers only about a minor third interval, or 3 semitones (3 half steps).  Not too significant at all.

 

[AKGunkie]

I've run through to the end of silver ears while my son watches cartoons with my surface RT and AKG K551s, most of it is much easier than getting to level seven here at Harman, but some parts are different; the hardest parts for me where the 2db treble boost and MP3 artifacts.

 

[Jon Sonne]

Maybe In my experience, I think the reverb is a lot more clear on big cans, because they can better portray soundstage and layering, but thats just my opinion.  

 

[Jon Sonne]

I was trying the mp3 artifacts again, and I found that if you listen carefully to the guitar, it is actually quite easy to tell them apart. You can clearly hear the plucking of the strings on the reference, while it is not as audible on the 128kbps. With this method I could tell them apart 10 out of 10 times.
 
My music library is mainly in 128kbps .... Now I have to re-rip my whole cd collection ..... 

    
 

 

[acain]

I just came across the golden ears test and its pretty cool. I am 38 and have been working in a machine shop for over 20 years so my hearing is shot to hell. More then half of my work life I never wore hearing protection. Just made an account need time away from the kids to do this. I am using a set of Shure SRH840  got past the first part but I am sure I wont get to far since I cant hear crap out of my right ear LOL.

 

[derbigpr]

I find the test boring, I wish I could skip the early levels, because it literally takes me 1 second to tell the correct answer and then I have to wait for test to change. It's more waiting than listening. I wish I could skip to the hardest tests immediately.

 

[AKGunkie]

  I find the test boring, I wish I could skip the early levels, because it literally takes me 1 second to tell the correct answer and then I have to wait for test to change. It's more waiting than listening. I wish I could skip to the hardest tests immediately.

I do agree, the beginning was depressingly easy. But its geared to someone who has never done any critical listening in the first stages.

 

[LancerFIN]

I'm stuck at 93% completed. Only things left are that 18 band frequency test and quiz. I just can't bother memorizing all 18 differences. Some of them are so close to each other.. So I'm done.
 
MP3 bitrate proved to be bit challenging at the beginning and reverb too but eventually learned to hear the difference. Had some difficulties with the last high frequency cut off one too. Everything else was quite easy.

 

[Benny Ben Bens]

That section is by far the hardest. I had to metagame through it with a second browser open on the training page.

 

[maricius]

The 18 bad frequency test is difficult not in hearing but really in the memory aspect of it. 

 

[00birdy]

What are everyone's strengths/weaknesses?  
Pretty cool thing to do, made me realize alot more about how to describe sounds.  I found identifying bass the simpliest, I don't think I had a single one wrong.  I actually prefer treble in my songs so this may be why I am more sensitive to it.  Loudness and details were also really easy.  Timbre was giving me trouble, and the part where you compare 128kbps mp3 I probably had more wrong answers on there than any other question.

I have to agree with some of the wavelength/EQ band ones simply being memorization.  The static noise one was annoying too.