5 ms·
I'm convinced that we can "hear" frequencies well above the reputed 20KHz limit of human hearing, as overtones, i.e. as tonal quality. I certainly don't have g
by denton-scratch 3y ago
I'm convinced that we can "hear" frequencies well above the reputed 20KHz limit of human hearing, as overtones, i.e. as tonal quality.
I certainly don't have golden ears; I'm no audiophile, and I'm getting on in years. 44KHz FLAC is easily good enough for me. But I tire of listening to MP3 music, after a few tens of minutes; it seems to lack the presence and immediacy that keeps me interested.
- willis936 3y agoThat's fine, but you should appreciate that you are lying to yourself until you perform a blind test to prove it.
- denton-scratch 3y ago> you are lying to yourself until [...] Not really. I'm not proposing a hypothesis that needs testing; I'm just reporting subjective anecdata. I don't need to test it, because even if I'm deluded it costs me 300GB instead of 100GB. Pfft. "Lying to yourself" is silly talk; that implies that I'm knowingly telling myself a falsehood, which doesn't make sense. At worst, I'm mistaken.
- willis936 3y ago>that implies that I'm knowingly telling myself a falsehood You are aware of a common fact backed up by mountains of empirical data, a strong physical explanation, and fundamentals of information theory, but tell yourself this lie: >I'm convinced that we can "hear" frequencies well above the reputed 20KHz limit of human hearing This is a lie. You tell it to yourself. You must see this.
- danbee 3y agoIf frequencies abover 20Khz are causing audible differences in the audible frequency range then that's considered distortion and there's an issue in your playback chain somewhere. https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html