Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Audio and Video Talk
General Discussion
The paradox of audio versus music and science versus arcane art
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support AVForums:
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ampdog" data-source="post: 17945" data-attributes="member: 144"><p>Really. When last has the author of this done his homework - 1970?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As said above. Taking the threshold of audibility as about -120dB, especially over the last few years instruments exist that could analyse as deep as -150dB. In fact I am in the process of installing such a spectrum analyser in my PC myself, as soon as I can get a suitable sound card. Believe me, especially with committed (and expensive!) instruments one is well able to measure both amplitude, frequency and phase magnitudes comfortably in excess of what human hearing is capable of. (Results of studies of the latter already existed a decade ago; something that would not have been possible if measuring instruments were poorer than hearing abilities.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This has also been proven decades ago - as I can recall the standard works by Moir of - oh - 50 years ago contained reference to this point. How they tested it then I do not know, but it is one of the facts of acoustics that is generally accepted. But it will depend heavily on what kind of memory/detail one is talking about. It is certainly possible to "remember" large enough differences for a long period. </p><p></p><p>The short period refers to where passages containing very small differences have to be repeated at intervals not much longer than say 30s for those differences to be noticed. I am not an expert in acoustics, but certain basics appear to be well established with those who know.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ampdog, post: 17945, member: 144"] Really. When last has the author of this done his homework - 1970? As said above. Taking the threshold of audibility as about -120dB, especially over the last few years instruments exist that could analyse as deep as -150dB. In fact I am in the process of installing such a spectrum analyser in my PC myself, as soon as I can get a suitable sound card. Believe me, especially with committed (and expensive!) instruments one is well able to measure both amplitude, frequency and phase magnitudes comfortably in excess of what human hearing is capable of. (Results of studies of the latter already existed a decade ago; something that would not have been possible if measuring instruments were poorer than hearing abilities.) This has also been proven decades ago - as I can recall the standard works by Moir of - oh - 50 years ago contained reference to this point. How they tested it then I do not know, but it is one of the facts of acoustics that is generally accepted. But it will depend heavily on what kind of memory/detail one is talking about. It is certainly possible to "remember" large enough differences for a long period. The short period refers to where passages containing very small differences have to be repeated at intervals not much longer than say 30s for those differences to be noticed. I am not an expert in acoustics, but certain basics appear to be well established with those who know. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Audio and Video Talk
General Discussion
The paradox of audio versus music and science versus arcane art
Top