|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
For Sale Ads |
Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.
Original Message
I got one example of where this is a fallacy....
Posted by Presto on February 14, 2007 at 16:00:38:
Frequency response.
Human ear? 40-19khz (teen) 40-16khz (middle aged adult).
(Yet we have audiophiles getting headaches from RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE!!!)
Test instruments? DC to light.
Sorry. Test equipment rules there.
Another nice thing about test instruments is that they don't rely on PERCEPTION.
Oh, by the way, the "measureability versus audibility" debate still goes on. You can't just say "ears won".
We'll you can. But you would need to refer to a universally accepted CONTEST that was held. There is a lot of talk on the subject but very few references to work done by auditory experts and authorities in the field of human hearing.
I think it is still largely debatable whether or not audiophiles actually DO (or CAN) hear differences that are (or would HAVE to be) below our current measuring capabilitites. One thing is for certain, if you PRETEND that you change a cable, you REALLY start getting reports that something changed. Now, how can we, in the face of this AMAZING evidence of the powers (and failings) of human PERCEPTION, even COMPARE our auditory systems to a calibrated instrument?
Theory not bought.
If this were true, manufacturers would HAVE no instruments. Just a bunch of middle aged guys locked in a closet and brought out whenever "critical listening" tests.
Anomalies in frequency response can be measured down to 0.1 db with cheap equipment.
Humans can only PERCEIVE changes of 3db or MAYBE 1db for an exceptionally trained ear.
Cheers,
Presto