random discussion thread
Aug 22, 2011 at 4:36 PM Post #781 of 804
^beautiful 
 
 
This was always my favourite or theirs...

 
Aug 23, 2011 at 1:26 AM Post #789 of 804
 
Quote:
That study's been torn to pieces.  You can track down nick_charles' posts on it if you want more detailed info but the gist of it is that the tweeters they were using had plenty of audible IMD at lower frequencies (<20khz) which most people can hear when the ultrasonic was added in.  I don't have the link but that same experiment was retried by others using better tweeters (or maybe a separate tweeter for the  ultrasonic, I can't remember which) to get rid of the IMD problem and no one could hear the ultrasonic stuff.


DO NOT BELIEVE!
 
 
Quote:
I used to listen more music back when I didnt had all this audio equipment...


YOUR POINT BEING?
 
 
 
Quote:
Quote:
Now sell your TF10 and join the UE700 club
wink.gif


I dunno... I have the UE 700, but I much prefer the Phonak PFE.


PFFT!
 
 
Aug 23, 2011 at 4:41 AM Post #795 of 804
 
Quote:
That study's been torn to pieces. You can track down nick_charles' posts on it if you want more detailed info but the gist of it is that the tweeters they were using had plenty of audible IMD at lower frequencies (<20khz) which most people can hear when the ultrasonic was added in. I don't have the link but that same experiment was retried by others using better tweeters (or maybe a separate tweeter for the ultrasonic, I can't remember which) to get rid of the IMD problem and no one could hear the ultrasonic stuff.


By the way the link I provided is using MRI brain scans to differentiate the normal frequency and high frequency reactions, not asking people if they could hear it or not, so that "tearing to pieces" doesn't seem valid, imho.
 
http://jn.physiology.org/content/83/6/3548.full

 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top