[Contrastique]

Interesting test. Thanx for posting!
My score:
Adaptive Pitch: 0,975 hz
Tone Perception 75%
Rythm Perception 84%

 

[axiom]

Quote:

Clutz: "The pitch tone test was centred around 500Hz iirc, so if you had headphones with really unstable frequency response around 500Hz, it could really affect your ability to percieve differences in tones - particularly when the differences become sub one Hz."

Yes, it was 500 Hz. I don't think the response will vary that much within 499-500 Hz or 500-501 Hz no matter what headphone you use, but I could be wrong. It is difficult to detect very small Hz differences in pitch at this level (unless the tones are played at the same time, then it is easy to detect much smaller differences, which is why instrumentalists tune by playing at the same time). Of course if someone has perfect pitch, it should be easy (not me...

)
BTW, 1 Hz at this level is equivalent to about 3.5% of a half step, a small difference indeed.

The reason I included the cents info before is because a difference of say 5 cents at 30 Hz is the same (audibly 5% of a half step) as 5 cents at 15000 Hz, but 5 Hz difference at 30 Hz will be up to 1/4 of an octave (a little more than a minor 3rd or almost 3.16 half steps) while 5 Hz difference at 15000 Hz would be at most .5% of a half step.

I guess what I'm saying is cents would give you a better idea of the amount of pitch difference you can hear than Hz (although you can convert between the two if you know the Hz level).

Also, many things can affect hearing such small differences. If you have a cold and anything to do with sinuses being the most obvious.

 

[Clutz]

Thanks for your very informative post axiom, it was really interesting.

There are obviously problems with these tests, and I don't really think they can be considered finely diagnostic, if only because they have relatively few "questions" per test, making it difficult to discern small differences. Also, someone's ability to detect differences in tone probably changes with the underlying frequency. Some people might be better able to resolve a given percent frequency change at 5kHz than 0.5kHz. If we relaly wanted to have a good test of our hearing, we'd need to perform this test over and over again across the frequency spectrum. That doesn't mean that this test isn't interesting, just that it isn't really a very good diagnostic test.

 

[axiom]

All very true. Points well taken

 

[Jazic]

Just did the Adaptive Pitch test twice and scored around 1hz first time and second time I took my time without guessing and scored 0.24375 Hz.

Didn't bother with the others as they are mostly memorizing but I'll do those later when I'm bored.

 

[bindibadgi]

Tone - 83.3%
Adaptive - 0.825Hz
Rhythm - 84%

Maybe I should try when I'm not in the noisy office and nervous that the boss will catch me ...

 

[thruhiker]

I'm sure number 33 on the tone perception test is different, yet the answer key has it as the same! For those of you who scored very well on this test, yet missed a few, was 33 one of the ones you missed?

 

[TheGhostWhoWalks]

Tone: 88%
Pitch: 0.7125
Rhythm: 76%

 

[Febs]

Tone: 86.1%
Adaptive pitch .825 Hz
Rhythm 76%

Edit:

Quote:

Originally Posted by thruhiker /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm sure number 33 on the tone perception test is different, yet the answer key has it as the same! For those of you who scored very well on this test, yet missed a few, was 33 one of the ones you missed?

Just curious--how do you know what the answer key is?

 

[Dexter Morgan]

I hope this isn't considered a thread hijack... but I thought some of you might be interested in checking out another hearing test. I think I saw a link to this on another thread months ago. This one isn't so much about testing your hearing memory or "talent," so to speak, but your capacity (aka testing for hearing loss). I'm not sure how accurate this is, but it seems pretty legit. The most thorough free test is the 2nd to last...

http://www.digital-recordings.com/he...-products.html

 

[grndslm]

With the exception of Sherwood and one or two others.... we all suck at listening to audio???

With all this big game of being able to hear the difference between different types and thicknesses of cables, interconnects... different sources... amps... cans... with & without volume pods... we can't listen for jack (that's *almost* a double pun, no?).

Either this test ain't accurate, or all our cans suck!!

I wish we knew where accurate tests were for sure...

 

[hciman77]

Adaptive Tone 6.4hz - normal/low normal
Rythmn - 84% Excellent
Tone - 75% Normal

For a 48 year old is this typical ?

I note also that you can improve your performance by practice, my adaptive tone varied a lot depending on how much I concentrated and by pausing once you make a decision after a test before you click the button

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grndslm /img/forum/go_quote.gif Either this test ain't accurate, or all our cans suck!! I wish we knew where accurate tests were for sure...

I tried the tests with headphones (AKG K240) and speakers JBL E20s and it was *much* easier with speakers.

Although my performance was only okay (apart from rythmn, where I did pretty well) the tests seem pretty fair and some people here did really well, i.e showing a range of abilities with some here performing well above average, assuming we all told the truth of course

It would be interesting for the high performers and low performers to reveal their ages.

 

[grndslm]

I think it'd be more revealing if we all had to list which headphone/speakers we used for the test.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grndslm /img/forum/go_quote.gif With all this big game of being able to hear the difference between different types and thicknesses of cables, interconnects... different sources... amps... cans... with & without volume pods... we can't listen for jack (that's *almost* a double pun, no?).

Blind tests rarely, if ever, show people capable of hearing the differences between cables of the same gauge or similar (same gauge) interconnects.

The measurable differences in terms of signal loss, which is all that a cable/interconnect can do, they can only lose more or less of the signal, they cant amplify it, are so tiny, even when you use different materials that you would need superhuman ears to detect it, you are talking
100ths of a db difference over a run of speaker wire and even smaller amounts in 3 foot interconnects. Even the real golden ears on this thread would be struggling to hear these differences. This isnt a matter for debate, the psychophysics lit very clearly defines human capabilities in this area and for the vast majority of people it is far grosser than the differences between cables, at least those that have not been designed to choke parts of the audio signal.

As for CD players here the measurable differences may be a lot bigger i.e
10ths of a db at certain frequencies, but once again blind testing rarely if ever shows these differences to be humanly detectable under controlled conditions.