Scientist vs. Audiophile |
Post Reply | Page <1 23456 7> |
Author | ||
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 25 2005 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 3254 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:03 | |
Ah well as we all know what make's a trumpet sound like a trumpet is the different frequency components that is compiled by the brain and then put together and then produce the sound which we all know as a trumpet. However as i said before Vinyl recordings can reproduce the different components too a much larger degree than cd at 16bit/44,1khz can. As you say a guitar has a max groun tone is 3700hz approximately but its harmonic overtones can range at a much larger scale even above 15 000hz! But all in all its up to the listener to deceide if you think this sound better or worse, more dynamic and so on...there is no scientific formula or fact that can prove that this sollution sounds better than the other because it is the Brain that compiles these sounds and the human brain is fairly complex |
||
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 26 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 6308 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:08 | |
Mike-->You admit that you can't hear the difference between original and Mp3 wheraes you admit that ther's a difference. That's the same with trumpet.
And yes, it's a paradox of good Hifi is that it reveals the good like the bad. It reveals the limits of CD technology while it exalts the qualities of good analog equipment. |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21149 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:18 | |
As can the CD ... it reaches up to 22,000hz, just like the human ear. Well, actually well BEYOND the human ear. 20,000hz is the maximum, typically only reached by very young people.
Yes - in fact the brain is so complex that it even combines the actual perceptions with our own experience and expectations. So sometimes we believe what we want to believe ... that makes it extremely different to remain objective. Do you honestly believe that somebody who spent $20,000 on a hifi system can actually have an objective opinion on the difference between his system and a cheap one? Edited by MikeEnRegalia |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21149 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:20 | |
I've had it up to here with your lies. Read the first post again and then try again.
Wishful Thinking ... how simple the world can be. I envy you! |
||
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 25 2005 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 3254 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:20 | |
Well as i said is that when the frequency components at higher frequencys begin to distort it will have something to say about how the overall experience is felt. Remember sound is much more than what we can hear! |
||
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 26 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 6308 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:21 | |
The audio world would be much more simple if CD should work!
|
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21149 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:38 | |
I explained it above - the distortion is in a frequency range that we cannot hear. Sad (for your theory) but true!
Maybe ... but that is a metaphysical discussion. Wenn discussing hifi systems I try to limit the discussion to the things that we can hear. |
||
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 25 2005 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 3254 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:41 | |
Ah so you are saying that we cant hear distortion above 15khz? Besides take forexample the sampling frequency that has to be twice the sound we want to sample for it to sound decent although we cant forexample hear 40 000hz And what my point with that everything you cant hear might is that there are some sound issues that can not be explained by physics,theory and formulas. The only thing that could deceide which is better is a listening test. But on paper digital is much weaker than analog Edited by Lindsay Lohan |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21149 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:49 | |
No, I'm saying that the distortions of the 15khz sine waveform are typically much higher in frequency than the waveform itself - like 2 or 3 times higher. And these are well beyond our perception. Remember that 15khz is a really high pitched sound. It is not a musical note - more like the typical sound which diseminates from some TV sets. Or like some Tinnitus sounds like the ones that you hear in games like Counter-Strike: Source when a grenade explodes right in front of you.
You might want to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist-Shannon_sampling_theore m You don't seem to get the idea. |
||
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 26 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 6308 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:52 | |
The simple fact that numerization simplifies the signal
greatly affects the sound. That's why marketers insisted so much on noise and clicks and pops: a good way to divert from the fact that numeric ruins the signal's integrity. |
||
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 25 2005 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 3254 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:54 | |
Yes i understand the sampling theorem but i just took it as an example and yes i know that 15 000hz is high pitched but it remember that there is also these high pithced frequencys that make the guitar sound like a real guitar! And dont underestimate the human ear! It can hear a difference in frequency of just 2hz! |
||
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 26 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 6308 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:57 | |
Yeah, human ear/brain is hard to fool!
|
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21149 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 11:58 | |
That depends on the actual frequency range: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoacoustics I'm willing to bet that nobody can distinguish 15,000hz and 15,002hz. |
||
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 25 2005 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 3254 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 12:01 | |
Actually as long as it is whitin the human range of hearing it should be able to tell apart...ofcourse the human ear amplifies frequencys from 1000-5000hz so they are easier to tell apart but the distortion for cd's is below 15 000
|
||
GoldenSpiral
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: May 27 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3839 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 15:02 | |
This may in fact be the most exasperating thread in history!
If one were to go through and read all the posts (excluding olivers, because they are just opinionated drivel with no back-up), it would seem that it still really all comes down to a matter of opinion. The fact is that digital audio at 44kHz-16-bit reproduces the analog sound very very well, but NOT exactly, and that expensive audio equipment improves sound, but only very slightly. it comes down to whether you think that tiny tiny difference is worth paying out the nose to fix. In my own personal, humble opinion, it is not. I'm going to have to stand behind mike on this one. |
||
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 26 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 6308 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 15:05 | |
Cut one head, another grows up!
|
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21149 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 15:34 | |
Thanks! I agree 100% with these two statements. |
||
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 25 2005 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 3254 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 15:39 | |
Digital audio will always have it flaws to analog just as a digital O can never be totally round digital music can never reproduce a perfect sine wave. In my opinion it all boils down to the how experienced the listener is. I know certain people that can't tell a mp3 file compressed in 128kb/ps apart from a full quality cd-track! So if people is not experienced enough they don't know how good it can get and therebefore they are adept with sound that is unmistakably weaker! As said it all comes out when you play music with a 105 man strong symphony orchestra! There's where the $3000 falls WAY short of the $30 000 stereo! The difference is like night and day like 128kb/ps mp3 files and cd's in SACD format! And if you really want to save money get a vinyl player! My vinyl player is a pretty cheap one ($500) and it can outplay most CD players that cost perhaps between $1500-2000! |
||
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Online Points: 21149 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 15:57 | |
You're totally missing the point. Even an analog O is never totally round. Zoom in closer and closer ... eventually you'll see atoms/molecules. The point is: The ear has a certain resolution, and it is totally irrellevant whether the reproduction of a signal is degraded beyond that resolution. It simply doesn't matter. |
||
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 25 2005 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 3254 |
Posted: March 13 2006 at 16:04 | |
Yes but the resolution is still not high enough to sound exactly the same as a analog recording. There is infact a screen that has such a high resolution that you can't tell apart reality from what is shown on the screen...now thats future! |
||
Post Reply | Page <1 23456 7> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |