[FFBookman]

Skin has hair.
Hair moves from air pressure changes caused by vibration.
Every hair on your body is connected to a nerve that sends movement detection to your brain.
 
How many hairs on your body? Less than 320k? Doubt that. Don't forget to count the thousands of micro-hairs in the inner-ear, both the ones suspended below the wall of liquid that acts as a natural limiter/expander, and the ones going down the inner spiral of the cochlea. Those have direct connections, they don't need the central nervous system. 
 
Do you know how fast the nerve sends signal to the brain? I don't know it from memory.
Maybe you should check your 16/44 resolution numbers against that.
 
Then don't forget the thousands of nerve endings in our joints that specifically track vibration and report it to our brain. Science is just discovering those, much less measuring them and duplicating them digitally. Science of human senses is still discovering lots of things, it's not settled like your electric circuit design science is.
 
Did you see the study released last year that shows that the human nose recognizes thousands of odors?  This was significant because we used to believe that the nose could only detect a couple hundred odors. 
 
The strange thing about this 16/44 debate is that no one thought that was all you could hear even in 1978. They figured it was a good compromise based on cost and file size, and it took critical listening of specific, dynamic music to require better resolution than 16/44.  Those people are long gone and you new people twisted this to think that the human ear+body, in all of it's magnificance, could only detect digital music at a resolution of 16/44, nothing higher ever.  That's a rewrite of history. There was 20bit audio in the early 80's.
 
It's always been about a compromise for the consumer's convenience/cost.  
 
There is no established science that backs you up because real science doesn't bother with determining what the best format to listen to music is.

 

[StanD]

So now your hair can hear ultrasonics. 

 

[FFBookman]

Cute icon, what are you 4?
 
I never mentioned ultrasonics. I said have you ever considered how many receptors the human body has for vibration?

 

[RRod]

 
Cute icon, what are you 4?
 
I never mentioned ultrasonics. I said have you ever considered how many receptors the human body has for vibration?

 
You have to be talking ultrasonics, because the audible range is already captured by 44.1kHz.

 

[StanD]

 
Cute icon, what are you 4?
 
I never mentioned ultrasonics. I said have you ever considered how many receptors the human body has for vibration?

No I'm 5, you're 4. You should stop shaving and getting your hair cut, wouldn't want to damage those receptors.

 

[FFBookman]

You have to be talking ultrasonics, because the audible range is already captured by 44.1kHz.
 

Keep repeating it, maybe it will become true for you.
 
The audible range goes beyond frequency. We hear a lot more than frequency.
 
You can tell the difference between a guitar, a piano, a violin, and a synthesizer playing the same note right?  Even if you cut off the beginning and end of the note (where lots of the clues are) most of us can still tell.
 
Why is that?  It's the same frequency.  I think you know. It's called timbre and there's no measuring it. There's no formula and it doesn't easily show itself on a waveform. 

 

[StanD]

 
Keep repeating it, maybe it will become true for you.
 
The audible range goes beyond frequency. We hear a lot more than frequency.
 
You can tell the difference between a guitar, a piano, a violin, and a synthesizer playing the same note right?  Even if you cut off the beginning and end of the note (where lots of the clues are) most of us can still tell.
 
Why is that?  It's the same frequency.  I think you know. It's called timbre and there's no measuring it. There's no formula and it doesn't easily show itself on a waveform. 

Duh, Timbre has both frequency components known as harmonics as well as amplitude known as the envelope. They are all measurable subject to the human limits of hearing when it comes to our perception. There are also time domain components such as phase and delay. You speak of timbre as if it's magic, stop trying to blow smoke when there is no point to be made.

 

[RRod]

 
Keep repeating it, maybe it will become true for you.
 
The audible range goes beyond frequency. We hear a lot more than frequency.
 
You can tell the difference between a guitar, a piano, a violin, and a synthesizer playing the same note right?  Even if you cut off the beginning and end of the note (where lots of the clues are) most of us can still tell.
 
Why is that?  It's the same frequency.  I think you know. It's called timbre and there's no measuring it. There's no formula and it doesn't easily show itself on a waveform. 

 
Wow, so now we can't even reproduce more than one frequency at a time! This keeps getting better and better.

 

[cjl]

   
Why is that?  It's the same frequency.  I think you know. It's called timbre and there's no measuring it. There's no formula and it doesn't easily show itself on a waveform. 

You're right - timbre doesn't easily show on a waveform at all. Oh, wait...
 
http://www.yuvalnov.org/temperament/graphs.jpg
http://usercontent2.hubimg.com/3422238_f520.jpg
http://www.clarkhuckaby.com/Fiddle/Dwn-Up-Wvfrms.jpg

 

[cel4145]

 

[StanD]

  You're right - timbre doesn't easily show on a waveform at all. Oh, wait...

Who's chopping down trees again?

 

[castleofargh]

if I ask a friend to register an account on headfi with the nickname "science", would that get currawong to ban bookman and delete his messages for pissing all over science repeatedly? 
 
just trying to find a better use for the PC police. it's the only reason why agent smith materializes in sound science nowadays.

 

[krismusic]

Skin has hair.
Hair moves from air pressure changes caused by vibration.
Every hair on your body is connected to a nerve that sends movement detection to your brain.

How many hairs on your body? Less than 320k? Doubt that. Don't forget to count the thousands of micro-hairs in the inner-ear, both the ones suspended below the wall of liquid that acts as a natural limiter/expander, and the ones going down the inner spiral of the cochlea. Those have direct connections, they don't need the central nervous system. 

Do you know how fast the nerve sends signal to the brain? I don't know it from memory.
Maybe you should check your 16/44 resolution numbers against that.

Then don't forget the thousands of nerve endings in our joints that specifically track vibration and report it to our brain. Science is just discovering those, much less measuring them and duplicating them digitally. Science of human senses is still discovering lots of things, it's not settled like your electric circuit design science is.

Did you see the study released last year that shows that the human nose recognizes thousands of odors?  This was significant because we used to believe that the nose could only detect a couple hundred odors. 

The strange thing about this 16/44 debate is that no one thought that was all you could hear even in 1978. They figured it was a good compromise based on cost and file size, and it took critical listening of specific, dynamic music to require better resolution than 16/44.  Those people are long gone and you new people twisted this to think that the human ear+body, in all of it's magnificance, could only detect digital music at a resolution of 16/44, nothing higher ever.  That's a rewrite of history. There was 20bit audio in the early 80's.

It's always been about a compromise for the consumer's convenience/cost.  

There is no established science that backs you up because real science doesn't bother with determining what the best format to listen to music is.

The effects of music on the body that you mention don't really apply to headphones.
I understand that quite a lot of real science has been used to try and establish what we can and cannot hear. Science substantiating your claims to hear the difference between lossless and MP3 seems rather thin on the ground...

 

[StanD]

The effects of music on the body that you mention don't really apply to headphones.
I understand that quite a lot of real science has been used to try and establish what we can and cannot hear. Science substantiating your claims to hear the difference between lossless and MP3 seems rather thin on the ground...

Perhaps he has a bit of ear hair, as unsightly as it is it happens.

 

[krismusic]

Perhaps he has a bit of ear hair, as unsightly as it is it happens.