[JaZZ]

  I cannot really produce ultrasonic tones.
 
...
 
Also, about ultrasonics, i hate to kill it, but they are excluded from the recording phase, most microphones cannot record much above 20Khz, and no studio will ever release a 192 or 384, with ultrasonics still there. And it is for the better, no equipment without a low pass filter does exist in reality, even if ultrasonics would remain, they are filtered by most stages, when i tried creating one, they were filtered out on the instant of trying to import the file, the tone is empty, if i try to work with ultrasonics.

 
Well, I may be able to produce ultrasonic tones – by drawing them by hand. So I may do the experiment myself, but not today. If it only were possible to downsample to a sampling rate of say 16 kHz and do the experiment three octaves lower. But the X5 wouldn't play the file anyway.
 
Since there are microphones specially developed for hi-res recordings*, I would be perplexed if one of these recordings would use an ultrasonic filter. What would it serve for?
 
Here's an article which confirms that (at least some) hi-res recordings contain a considerable amount of ultrasonics.
 
* http://en-de.sennheiser.com/studio-condenser-microphone-digital-recording-systems-mkh-800-p48
  http://en-de.sennheiser.com/condenser-microphone-cardioid-guitar-acoustic-bass-brass-mkh-8040
  http://de-de.sennheiser.com/kondensatormikrofon-cardioid-studio-recordings-orchester-mkh-8090
  http://www.sanken-mic.com/en/product/freqpola.cfm/3.1000800
  http://www.sanken-mic.com/en/product/freqpola.cfm/3.1000400
  [just for measuring purposes:] http://www.bksv.com/Products/transducers/acoustic/microphones/microphone-cartridges/4138

 

[Kokomo O]

It makes your car sound better, or makes your car stereo sound better?

Makes the car stereo sound better--by which I mean it's the best input I've yet heard, including the car stereo's own CD player, although I can't compare the two, as the CD player gave out about three years ago. The car is a 2006 Saab, and you don't get rid of those short of 250,000 miles, even with things like CD players and gas gauges going.

 

[nmatheis]

Here we go again, X5 thread taken over by Sound Science lurkers :blink:

 

[JaZZ]

Here we go again, X5 thread taken over by Sound Science lurkers

 
Sorry for that, but it's hard to stop oneself and an ongoing dicussion about a fundamental, worldshaking topic.

 

[Dobrescu George]

  Good point - now can we move on?

it has something to do with x5, as it also can play hi res files. if you are un-interested it is simpler not to read about it.

Here we go again, X5 thread taken over by Sound Science lurkers

sorry for this, but it is a topic that concerns music, the reason fiio x5 exists, and file formats used with it. why not take part? it is interesting.

   
Well, I may be able to produce ultrasonic tones – by drawing them by hand. So I may do the experiment myself, but not today. If it only were possible to downsample to a sampling rate of say 16 kHz and do the experiment three octaves lower. But the X5 wouldn't play the file anyway.
 
Since there are microphones specially developed for hi-res recordings*, I would be perplexed if one of these recordings would use an ultrasonic filter. What would it serve for?
 
Here's an article which confirms that (at least some) hi-res recordings contain a considerable amount of ultrasonics.
 
* http://en-de.sennheiser.com/studio-condenser-microphone-digital-recording-systems-mkh-800-p48
  http://en-de.sennheiser.com/condenser-microphone-cardioid-guitar-acoustic-bass-brass-mkh-8040
  http://de-de.sennheiser.com/kondensatormikrofon-cardioid-studio-recordings-orchester-mkh-8090
  http://www.sanken-mic.com/en/product/freqpola.cfm/3.1000800
  http://www.sanken-mic.com/en/product/freqpola.cfm/3.1000400
  [just for measuring purposes:] http://www.bksv.com/Products/transducers/acoustic/microphones/microphone-cartridges/4138

okay, the examples you have given are totally correct.
 
Ultrasonics can be recorded, as this is also done with dolphins.
 
But no ultrasonics leave laboratories, as they cannot be anyways interpolated by DACs which already have a low filter implemented. 
 
You can actually test this, create a 40Khz or 30 Khz tone, and try to record straight from x5's line out. Or any other DAC for that matter. 
 
You will never be able to get ultrasonics, there are 3 steps that i know of in a recording process that erase ultrasonics.
 
Also, the article you provided has mostly noise, continous noise in that area, not notes or variable anything. like recording the air, but a very steady air.
 
Even i need to implement a low pass filter into my project to be able to interpolate samples correctly, it is almost impossible to interpolate samples if they are over 22.5Khz as most interpolation algorithms use processing power, from there on, there is much more power needed for calculations. 
 
Sub harmonics created by them, as i said earlier, if they exist, they are already recorded. this is why interpolation and digital reproduction must eliminate subharmonics like it does with noise, because already recorded harmonics would overlap with new ones, if created, and this would raise THD noise, by quite a considerable margin.
 
 
 
 
 
Again, sorry for taking this into x5 thread, but it is my DAC right now, data is about it, and i guess that discussion is not entirely pointless. there are more people interested, and it is usefull to have.
Also, i do not start this on sound science, because over there i would be told that resampling does not make a difference, because it does not exist, where i demonstrated in two occasions, that the differences exist, and are audible.
 
EDIT::: a final word for this would be that no headphone nor speaker produces ultrasonics, and harmonics tend to appear after the sound is already in air, as i understand it. so unless using headphones or speakers producing the ultrasonics, the ultrasonic harmonics, even of high order should not appear.

 

[bavinck]

I agree, it's time to move on past this debate.

 

[JaZZ]

  But no ultrasonics leave laboratories, as they cannot be anyways interpolated by DACs which already have a low filter implemented. You can actually test this, create a 40Khz or 30 Khz tone, and try to record straight from x5's line out. Or any other DAC for that matter.

 
I'm very sure that the X5 would output those 40 and 30 kHz tones. I don't know of any DAC which would filter high-res sampling rates strictly at 20 kHz. Note: the X5 is 192 kHz compatible, so it will reproduce at least up to 40 kHz, more likely 60 kHz or higher at this rate.
 

You will never be able to get ultrasonics, there are 3 steps that i know of in a recording process that erase ultrasonics.

 
You seem to mix this up with 44.1 kHz recordings where the ADC has to be fed with low-pass filtered signals to prevent aliasing. Maybe a thing of the past, as I guess nowadays most recordings are done with higher sampling rates, even those meant to be published on a CD. Not sure if e.g. a 88.2 kHz recording has to get low-pass filtered before ADC, but if so, it will be at 44 kHz or so, not 20 kHz.
 

Also, the article you provided has mostly noise, continous noise in that area, not notes or variable anything. like recording the air, but a very steady air.

 
How do you know that? It absolutely doesn't look like this, and the comment clearly speaks against it. It would be an enormously high noise floor if it were one, and since it's a PCM, not a DSD recording, it's simply impossible. These are true overtones from instruments, as the comment indicates.

 

[nmatheis]

Maybe you guys can hash this out over PM or something?

 

[Chris J]

Good point - now can we move on?

No.

I agree, it's time to move on past this debate.

Use the block button if you don't like it.

Maybe you guys can hash this out over PM or something?

I suppose we could.

 

[Chris J]

It would be hilarious if the X5 improved engine sound quality too.

It improves gas milage.

 

[Brooko]

Chris / Jazz / George - here's the rub.  I suggested some pages ago that putting this type of discussion (EQ / harmonics / etc) on the X5 thread  - while related - fills the thread with a topic I'd suggest most of us aren't interested in.  it would be better served in it's own sub-thread.  You guys can all subscribe, and discuss to your heart's content.
 
Chris - I don't personally want to block anyone - especially not you guys, as I follow a lot of your other posts (in other threads) and find them very informative.  However this current line of discussion gives me zero interest. Worse, I have to wade through it all so that I don't miss out on anything that is truly on topic (directly X5 related).
 
Honestly - over the last few days I've even thought about unsubbing from this thread just because I'm getting sick of this discussion.  And at this point - whilst you could say that it is X5 related - in reality it really isn't directly.
 
I agree with nmatheis and bavinck.  Please start your own thread.

 

[Chris J]

Chris / Jazz / George - here's the rub.  I suggested some pages ago that putting this type of discussion (EQ / harmonics / etc) on the X5 thread  - while related - fills the thread with a topic I'd suggest most of us aren't interested in.  it would be better served in it's own sub-thread.  You guys can all subscribe, and discuss to your heart's content.

Chris - I don't personally want to block anyone - especially not you guys, as I follow a lot of your other posts (in other threads) and find them very informative.  However this current line of discussion gives me zero interest. Worse, I have to wade through it all so that I don't miss out on anything that is truly on topic (directly X5 related).

Honestly - over the last few days I've even thought about unsubbing from this thread just because I'm getting sick of this discussion.  And at this point - whilst you could say that it is X5 related - in reality it really isn't directly.

I agree with nmatheis and bavinck.  Please start your own thread.

OK, putting aside all my sarcasm for a minute.....
a few weeks ago the X5 thread went into a big long IEM tangent.
I don't use IEMs and wasn't very interested.
Arguably they should have made another thread. Did they?
See my point?

 

[JaZZ]

I see the problem, and I won't post about this subject anymore in this thread. A new thread for those interested would be a good idea. I don't know if I will start one, though, as most of what I wanted to express has been expressed. Moreover the experiment to confirm my theory is unnecessary, since the only thing needed for prove is the critical signal shape, which is just a matter of producing it.
 
Getting sick about a serious audio discussion, admittedly off topic, is a hard word, and I feel a little demotivated, because I'm really enagaged and interested in this subject, it's not about fighting. But I will leave the playing field to more on.topic posts.

 

[Brooko]

OK, putting aside all my sarcasm for a minute.....
a few weeks ago the X5 thread went into a big long IEM tangent.
I don't use IEMs and wasn't very interested.
Arguably they should have made another thread. Did they?
See my point?

 
I see the point Chris - did you raise it?
 
Again - all I'm making is a reasonable request.  This current topic would relate to any DAP - not just the X5 - and IMO relation to the X5 at this point is irrelevant.  So for now (again just IMO) it no longer belongs here.

 

[Brooko]

  I see the problem, and I won't post about this subject anymore in this thread. A new thread for those interested would be a good idea. I don't know if I will start one, though, as most of what I wanted to express has been expressed. Moreover the experiment to confirm my theory is unnecessary, since the only thing needed for prove is the critical signal shape, which is just a matter of producing it.
 
Getting sick about a serious audio discussion, admittedly off topic, is a hard word, and I feel a little demotivated, because I'm really enagaged and interested in this subject, it's not about fighting. But I will leave the playing field to more on.topic posts.

 
Thanks Jazz.  I don't want to stop the discussion - as I can see that you Chris and George have a real interest in it.  Please start a new thread, as I'd be the last person to want to see the discussion stopped.  I'd just prefer it it wasn't here.