Recommended reading re: 'hi-rez'

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Dan Lavry has once again nicely and entertainingly summarized the facts
and fallacies of 'high resolution' audio.

It was originally posted on the excellent Mastering web board
http://webbd.nls.net:8080/~mastering/login
which requires a guest login, but was kindly reprinted in a more linkable
place (the forums at lukpac.org):

http://forums.lukpac.org/viewtopic.php?p=5722&highlight=#5722

btw, I am 'krabapple' on that forum

--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<oImxc.4890$0y.4398@attbi_s03>...
> Dan Lavry has once again nicely and entertainingly summarized the facts
> and fallacies of 'high resolution' audio.
>
> It was originally posted on the excellent Mastering web board
> http://webbd.nls.net:8080/~mastering/login
> which requires a guest login, but was kindly reprinted in a more linkable
> place (the forums at lukpac.org):
>
> http://forums.lukpac.org/viewtopic.php?p=5722&highlight=#5722
>
> btw, I am 'krabapple' on that forum


I refer to his first question:-

1. People can not hear above 40KHz (yes/no)

According to Mr Oohashi of Department of KANSEI Brain Science, ATR
Human Information Processing Research Laboratories human do hear
frequencies upto 100KHZ. He even experimented by filtering out
frequencies above audible level to see whether we can tell the
difference.


His full article is at www.sowter.co.uk/pdf/ultrasonichearing.pdf

Cheers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<oImxc.4890$0y.4398@attbi_s03>...
> Dan Lavry has once again nicely and entertainingly summarized the facts
> and fallacies of 'high resolution' audio.
>
> It was originally posted on the excellent Mastering web board
> http://webbd.nls.net:8080/~mastering/login
> which requires a guest login, but was kindly reprinted in a more linkable
> place (the forums at lukpac.org):
>
> http://forums.lukpac.org/viewtopic.php?p=5722&highlight=#5722
>
> btw, I am 'krabapple' on that forum

I refer to my earlier post and would like to clarify that it should
have been 60Khz instead 100Khz. However, I can't find the phrase in
the article but quite sure read it before.

It looks like the article has manifested in many forms. Unless there
are several similar articles by Mr Oohashi. One article do refer to
60Khz but it is quote.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

TChelvam <tchelvam@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<oImxc.4890$0y.4398@attbi_s03>...
> > Dan Lavry has once again nicely and entertainingly summarized the facts
> > and fallacies of 'high resolution' audio.
> >
> > It was originally posted on the excellent Mastering web board
> > http://webbd.nls.net:8080/~mastering/login
> > which requires a guest login, but was kindly reprinted in a more linkable
> > place (the forums at lukpac.org):
> >
> > http://forums.lukpac.org/viewtopic.php?p=5722&highlight=#5722
> >
> > btw, I am 'krabapple' on that forum


> I refer to his first question:-

> 1. People can not hear above 40KHz (yes/no)

> According to Mr Oohashi of Department of KANSEI Brain Science, ATR
> Human Information Processing Research Laboratories human do hear
> frequencies upto 100KHZ. He even experimented by filtering out
> frequencies above audible level to see whether we can tell the
> difference.

Actually, he doesn't show that anyone *hears* these frequencies.
Nor have his results been replicated.

> His full article is at www.sowter.co.uk/pdf/ultrasonichearing.pdf

Been there, read that.


--

-S.
Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. --
spiffy <thatsright@excite.co>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message news:<cab0j10iu@news4.newsguy.com>...
>
> Actually, he doesn't show that anyone *hears* these frequencies.
> Nor have his results been replicated.
>
> > His full article is at www.sowter.co.uk/pdf/ultrasonichearing.pdf
>
> Been there, read that.

yeap..his results were inconclusive. Except for the one girl. one out
of 33 that's roughly 3%.

See here http://www.nhk.or.jp/strl/publica/labnote/lab486.html .
Probably been there, too.