[Heidegger]

Quote:

Quote:

Some interesting tidbits on perception and hearing: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue52/ultrasonic.htm

 
Missing from that article is a plausible explanation for how ultrasonic sound is generated from typical hi-fi loudspeakers which rarely have any real output above 20 KHz. How could one conclude that CDs are "missing" something compared to LPs and analog tape when few microphones can capture frequencies that high, and few loudspeakers ever play back that high?
 
--Ethan

Ethan, even my headphones go up past 30kHz and speakers go up much more. There are mics than can do 100kHz.

 

[Happy Camper]

 
Quote:

The A/B " blind" testing is nothing new to the Audio industry within the last couple decades. A simple search on AVS forum where all the genius rocket scientists gather together to challenge that amp is amp, cable is cable, DVD and CDP are all sound the same.
 
My take is if you do not hear the difference why bother with someone's preference.  If a pair of  clothes hanger sound as good as the Silver Streak then use the clothes hanger and save your money for some rainy days. If NAD amp sounds the same with Krell amp or Audio Research amp when driving the Martin Logan , then go with the NAD, there will be abundance of money left behind for your off-springs . Emotiva products are another example. There are plenty of fans who love the Emo and consider the Emo are among the best there is but there are others who believe otherwise. So is it a myth or is it a listening skill that require years the training one ears to differentiate the sound from one product to another product in the same line ( I.E : amp to amp )
 
There is no wrong and right answer. I prefer Martin Logan to dynamic speakers and I prefer to have the Krell to drive the Martin Logan SL3 and the Re-Quest than to have the NAD or Rotel to do the job because I can hear the difference in my enviroment and in my set up. Is it a myth ? To another guy who drive the Martin logan SL3 with the B & K receiver or the top of the line of the PioElite receiver, since he cannot hear no difference between the B &K and the PIO with the Krell or Bryston. Is it a myth or is it something wrong with his listening skill?
 
It is what it is. There is no wrong or right answer here. If I can hear the difference and another person cannot then more power to that person. The power of saving the money that is. Other than that, the scientific blind test within the last couple decades does not stop  people who can hear the difference from buying audio gear according to their own preference and taste.
 
It does not and will not stop me from buying Kimber Kables while according to someones else theRadioShack cables or Mono-Price cables supposedly produce the same sound quality.  Hey, this is a hobby for the discriminated ears and the non-discriminated ears. That's the beauty of it. I am happy with my SilverStreak/ Hero/ PBJ so do not tell me that it makes me wiser to buy Monster or RadioShack cables and so on and so on.
 
Happy listening and enjoy the music, either with a pair of clothes hangers or a pair of SilverStreak.  Just enjoy the music and have a good time. That's all it count.

Dude, you mapped my quest trying to drive my MLs. I started with NAD, Carver, Rotel and now B&K separates for the last 10 years.

 

[Heidegger]

Quote:

 

1.  Please post a link to the Japanese study to which you refer.  This is the Oohashi study http://jn.physiology.org/content/83/6/3548.full.pdf+html but it is not about high res vs CD it is about hypersonic frequencies,  later researchers [size=x-small][size=x-small]Nishigichi et al, ‘Perceptual Discrimination between Musical Sounds with and without Very [/size][/size][size=x-small][size=x-small]High Frequency Components’. NHK Laboratory Note No 486. AES 115[/size][/size][size=xx-small][size=xx-small]th [/size][/size][size=x-small][size=x-small]Convention 2003 [/size][/size][size=x-small][size=x-small]NY October [/size][/size]were unable to replicate the effect and attribute the effect to the filters used...also Oohashi in later research discovered that if only the ears and not the body were exposed to the stimulae there was no effect.
 
 
.

[size=xx-small] [/size]

High resolution SACD entered into it:
[size=xx-small] [/size]
[size=xx-small]To carry out further experiments on this effect, we developed "Authentic Signal Disc" that is super audio CD (SACD) software containing the authentic signals for the hypersonic effect and "Authentic Hypersonic Audio System" that could reproduce the hypersonic effect. [/size]
 
As to your second point: As much as I like headphones there is nothing like listening to music with your entire body. But of course headphones have their own advantages. And yet I can't stand listening to CDs even on headphones. SACD totally ruined me for CD. Whether it is psychological or physiological or both matters little when the end result is so enjoyable. I'm also a fan of blu-ray and dvd-audio, both of which sound better than CD to me.
      
 

 

[Heidegger]

Quote:

 
Heidegger, you are clearly very attached to SACD

You said it!

 

[Heidegger]

Quote:

Thanks Nick.  I have heard reference (from you IIRC) to the Oohashi study before.  As I suspected - nothing new, and nothing definitive.

There's nothing definitive either way since all the blind studies have also been heavily criticized and their flaws pointed out. Moreover, there's at least one where people were able to tell low and hi resolutions apart.

 

[Heidegger]

 


 
Quote:

Quote:

I have heard reference (from you IIRC) to the Oohashi study before.  As I suspected - nothing new, and nothing definitive.

Further, the Oohashi study has been debunked and its flaws explained. Visit the Hydrogen Audio forum for the full details. The short version is they played multiple simultaneous tones through a single tweeter, and the tweeter's own IM distortion created alias difference frequencies within the audible band. So that's what people heard. When other researchers repeated the test using multiple tweeters, with one for each tone, nobody was able to hear or "perceive" the ultrasonic content.
 
--Ethan

I think it would be more accurate to say that parts of the study have been questioned. Anyhow, I was referring to the physiological responses:
 
[size=xx-small]"Noninvasive physiological measurements of brain responses provide evidence that sounds containing HFCs above the audible range significantly affect the brain activity of listeners." [/size]
 
[size=xx-small]The Oohashi study itself states that people weren't able to perceive the ultrasonic content.[/size]
 

 

 

[ACDOAN]

Quote:

Quote:

 

1.  Please post a link to the Japanese study to which you refer.  This is the Oohashi study http://jn.physiology.org/content/83/6/3548.full.pdf+html but it is not about high res vs CD it is about hypersonic frequencies,  later researchers [size=x-small][size=x-small]Nishigichi et al, ‘Perceptual Discrimination between Musical Sounds with and without Very [/size][/size][size=x-small][size=x-small]High Frequency Components’. NHK Laboratory Note No 486. AES 115[/size][/size][size=xx-small][size=xx-small]th [/size][/size][size=x-small][size=x-small]Convention 2003 [/size][/size][size=x-small][size=x-small]NY October [/size][/size]were unable to replicate the effect and attribute the effect to the filters used...also Oohashi in later research discovered that if only the ears and not the body were exposed to the stimulae there was no effect.
 
 
.

[size=xx-small] [/size]

High resolution SACD entered into it:
[size=xx-small] [/size]
[size=xx-small]To carry out further experiments on this effect, we developed "Authentic Signal Disc" that is super audio CD (SACD) software containing the authentic signals for the hypersonic effect and "Authentic Hypersonic Audio System" that could reproduce the hypersonic effect. [/size]
 
As to your second point: As much as I like headphones there is nothing like listening to music with your entire body. But of course headphones have their own advantages. And yet I can't stand listening to CDs even on headphones. SACD totally ruined me for CD. Whether it is psychological or physiological or both matters little when I'm in the throes of aural ecstasy. I'm also a fan of blu-ray and dvd-audio, both of which sound better than CD to me.
      
 

Try to listen to " The Spanish Harlem " by Rebecca Pidgeon on CD then on SACD on the same disc and if a person cannot hear the diference , I am really sorry for their ability to hear and their listening skill..
 
As far as LPs  as one poster mentioned, I can only sum it up in one adjective : Organic.

 

[nick_charles]

Moreover, there's at least one where people were able to tell low and hi resolutions apart.

 


Citation ?

 

[Heidegger]

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=15398
 
Please don't say it's another inconclusive study. They all are.

 

[nick_charles]

 
Quote:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=15398
 
Please don't say it's another inconclusive study. They all are.

 Ah, I know that one, I have the full paper, I am an AES member. Have you read the full paper ? It is important to read the full paper not just the abstract. There is a lively discussion of it on Hydrogen Audio
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=82264 it is certainly an interesting and thought-provoking paper but there are some serious concerns about the methods both experimental and for conversion and the stats are certainly a bit questionable - i.e with enough samples some will always be significant by chance alone and using a two-tailed test to show that folks can accurately do A=X or B=X. blind tests, a twotailed tests mean you can get a significant result when the testers get it wrong more often than they should do. There is a certain amount of cherry-picking in the data - chosing to exclude outliers from a global analysis and despite repeated calls the authors would not stump up the raw data which would have allowed us to have run our own stats. But read the full paper and see what you think. If you are a student you can get AES membership cheap and then pick up the paper for $5 - in general the AES has a whole bunch of interesting papers on these kinds of topics including the controversial Meyer and Moran.

 

[nick_charles]

 
Quote:

 
I think it would be more accurate to say that parts of the study have been questioned. Anyhow, I was referring to the physiological responses:
 
[size=xx-small]"Noninvasive physiological measurements of brain responses provide evidence that sounds containing HFCs above the audible range significantly affect the brain activity of listeners." [/size]
 
[size=xx-small]The Oohashi study itself states that people weren't able to perceive the ultrasonic content.[/size]
 
 

 But, the replication study suggests that having ultrasonic content per se present was not causing the physiological changes it was the IMD and thus new audible sidebands that caused the physiological effects, that is the argument anyway.

 

[EthanWiner]

Quote:

I am enjoying SACD more than I ever enjoyed CD.

You may find the exhaustive study described here interesting:
 
The Emperor's New Sample Rate

 

[EthanWiner]

Quote:

Ethan, even my headphones go up past 30kHz and speakers go up much more. There are mics than can do 100kHz.

Perhaps one or two speakers play that high, but most speakers and microphones don't go past 20 KHz, and many don't even go that high.
 
--Ethan

 

[Heidegger]

Quote:

Quote:

I am enjoying SACD more than I ever enjoyed CD.

You may find the exhaustive study described here interesting:
 
The Emperor's New Sample Rate

Meyer/Moran has been a subject of intense discussion at an SACD forum. The posters there point to all sorts of problems with it, although I couldn't say whether the criticisms are justified.

 

[Heidegger]

Quote:

 
 But, the replication study suggests that having ultrasonic content per se present was not causing the physiological changes it was the IMD and thus new audible sidebands that caused the physiological effects, that is the argument anyway.

I would note that the preponderance of studies I know about do come out in favor of "humans cannot tell a difference between high and low resolution." At the same time, none of them seem to be definitive, they have all been criticized, and I consider the jury still to be out. I do know one thing is incontrovertible: I will not be exchanging my Cardas cable for the stock Sennheiser cable, and I will not give up the sound I get from sacd, dvd-audio, and blu-ray in favor of red book cd.  That much is certain.
 
That's not to say that all sacds sound wonderful. They run the gamut. There are other factors such as mic placement that make a huge difference to me.