on 10/30/01 9:07 PM, Marco Mailand at Newton2k1_at_mac.com wrote:
> We hear 1/100 of Hertz difference between two e.g. guitar strings
> and we hear also the small jitter caused by dirt on the capstan shaft. But
> the lowpass filter of a normal CD player sits at 20kHz which is about as
> twice as much as we can hear.
A couple of items. First, it has been shown that 20k is within the hearing
of the average person. Secondly, no sound exists alone. Each sound creates
harmonics. A 20khz sound creates harmonics both upward and downward into
definitely audible hearing range. These harmonics work off of other sounds
and frequencies. The sudden cutoff on early CDs created a very audible, and
fatiguing (over long periods of time) artifact. You mentioned some of the
things that DA converters have done to tone a lot of this down.
A lot of this argument sound an awful lot like the early tubes (valves for
you Brits) v.s. Transistor arguments. Then along came Carver (I think) who
claimed that he could make his transister amps perfectly mimic the sonic
characteristics of any tube amp. I seem to recall that he convinced a lot of
people. :-)
The truth is, audiophile equipment can create audible differences. Often,
however, as you mentioned, the listening environment has a greater impact on
the sound quality than the equipment, and most equipment today is much
better than it was 20 years ago, and even on par with audiophile equipment
of 20 or 30 years ago. Another factor that people often ignore is taste.
Some people prefer a more bright sound, and others a more "warm" (or I say
muddy) sound. :-) The one who prefers a brighter sound, will say that
equipment that adds that is better, and visa versa the other side of the
equation. It's hard to find a true reference standard, with most references
chosen more for the sake of comparison than for an absolute reference.
I wouldn't poo poo it all outright. I had a tape deck loose its azimuth
setting, and one day, while adjusting it, I had a friend tell me that I was
wasting my time, that it didn't change the way it sounded. I carefully
positioned him for best reception of those upper frequencies, and set the eq
for maximum treble, and minimum base, and adjusted it out so he could hear
how muddy the cassette sounded (one with a lot of high frequencies--cymbals,
I think) and then set the azimuth again, and he said he couldn't hear any
difference. Weird. I then adjusted the eq, and he claimed he could hear
those changes, but he said he couldn't hear the differences when I adjusted
the azimuth. Granted it was only a 5 or 7 band eq, but he should have heard
the azimuth differences if he could hear the eq changes. I'm not sure if he
just hadn't trained his ear, or was deaf of the ultra high frequencies that
the adjustment to the azimuth modified. Weird is all I can say.
-- Jon Glass Krakow, Poland <jonglass_at_usa.net>"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! - I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry
-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Nov 01 2001 - 10:02:54 EST