1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

question about monitors

Discussion in 'Monitoring / Headphones' started by Pharaoh, Aug 31, 2009.

  1. Pharaoh

    Pharaoh Active Member

    Hi guys,
    i'm new (comparing to most of you) in business and since i plan to buy a pair of monitors this autumn, i recently started to read more about them. What i have noticed is that some of them have a frequency response above 20 khz (especially the Adam monitors). Now pls help understand why, because i read that human ear detects sounds from 16 hz to 20 khz.
     
  2. Link555

    Link555 Well-Known Member

    Yes the average ear does. However some people believe that humans actually do preceive frequencies higher than 20k.

    Rupert Neve did a very crude test. He played an audience a 10kHz sine wave and then a 10kHz square wave, and everyone in the place agreed that the two waves sound different. The first harmonic on of a 10kHz square wave in theory should the third, which is 30kHz.

    He concluded that because the audience could hear the difference, they must be at least hearing the 30kHz harmonic.
     
  3. Pharaoh

    Pharaoh Active Member

    interesting....
     
  4. djmukilteo

    djmukilteo Well-Known Member

    An interesting topic indeed
    Maybe a hearing test is in order!
    That way you'll know if you have accurate enough hearing to use those monitors!
    I think I'll work on a song that only uses sounds in a range from 1kHz-5kHz
    That way everybody will hear the whole thing!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoacoustics
     
  5. Link555

    Link555 Well-Known Member

    Just to show the other argument. Some say Rupert Neve test is flawed as the energy of a square wave is higher than a sine wave at the same nominal amplitude, so the square wave sounds louder.
    (this assumes you take the some of the harmonics)

    Then there are people that say the transfomers in the signal path introduce slewing and intermodulation distortion from the square wave, some of which may end up in the audible range.

    And, then there are the speakers which create there own distoritions.

    It is a very complex thing.
     
  6. valverec

    valverec Guest

    I agree, I think Neve's test is flawed. There are too many variables in there and reasons why people might perceive one type of wave to sound better than another, and you can't say with 100 percent certainty that THE reason that people perceived one type of wave to sound better than another was because of the third order harmonics, when the very equipment used to play it back ads in many different variables into how it's perceived by the listener.
     
  7. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    This is just another example of how hard it is to conduct really accurate, controlled listening tests. I think if I was going to do the test over, I'd send both signals out at several different amplitudes and randomly scramble the samples and see if people could accurately identify the sine and the square.

    Even then, it's good to treat any test with a lot of skepticism. We all know that the most important thing is that red components are cooler than black ones.
     
  8. Link555

    Link555 Well-Known Member

    lol- I don't know Bob I like Blue components the best.
     
  9. Codemonkey

    Codemonkey Well-Known Member

    I agree with Bob - red is good. Unless it's a lit clip indicator.
     
  10. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Guest

    Here is an interesting comparison.

    About 10 years ago, maybe more? At the AES convention a brand-new high-definition 24-bit 192kHz converter was demonstrated. At the time, our computer technology could not even record that. So the entire test was done A2D2A, or "E TO E" as its better-known as. Original material was on a 30 IPS AMPEX one half inch ATR 102. I was the only one at the entire show that could recognize the difference that year. What everyone perceived to be a wider stereo image & better high frequency articulation was in fact Digital artifacts. So the more blase monocentric examples were the original source. So that screws everyone's definition of what digital converters should sound like. Sorry but it's true. Anything PCM sounds like PCM, I don't care how many bits or sample rates utilized. It's just convenient, cheap & plentiful. Single bit technology is a whole lot different sounding. And we won't see that becoming commonplace for years to come. So don't worry about it. It will take the next great leap of technology before we get there. And nobody is handing you $50,000 yet to produce your vanity CD.

    Ear on rear
    Mx. Remy Ann David
     
  11. Kev

    Kev Well-Known Member

    I think we could do a lot more research on distortion and the perception of distortion

    to present a single Harmonic Distortion figure ... or the TIM .. Transient Intermodulation
    just doesn't seem to be enough to describe a set of monitors

    add to this group delay and lobing and heaps more

    hard to put all these details on paper
    or to explain why things/gear sounds different
     
  12. Codemonkey

    Codemonkey Well-Known Member

    I had a thought last night...

    The ear only hears things when the speaker changes position, right? So a flat wave is inaudible.

    Surely, then, a square wave would be inaudible through a "perfect" output system?

    If there's a digital representation, the rising/falling parts of the wave would cause a single sample of whatever the nyquist frequency of the sample rate is, and then go back to silence until the next falling/rising.
    This also seems irrespective of the base frequency to me.

    And no, I wasn't drinking last night!
     
  13. rockstardave

    rockstardave Active Member

    i was drinking last night though.
     
  14. Link555

    Link555 Well-Known Member

    Codemonkey: What do you mean by flat wave?
    And Remy please fill me in, what is single bit recording?
     
  15. Codemonkey

    Codemonkey Well-Known Member

    A square wave... when viewed on an oscilloscope, it's a flat line above zero, then drops instantly to a flat line below zero. I think?

    Poor word choice on my part.
     
  16. rockstardave

    rockstardave Active Member

    ooh single-bit recording is sweet! check out some new stuff from Korg .. the MR1000.

    instead of lots of bit depth (16, 24, etc) and minimum sample rates (44.1, 48, etc) , single-bit recording only records 1 bit (either the sound wave goes up or down, ie- 0 or 1) but does so millions of times per second.

    it measures in MHz instead of KHz. mega > kilo.

    so each "step of measurement" only moves a little, but it takes these measurements way more often.

    NEAT!

    they call it future-proof because it maintains very high quality, no matter how you render it down.

    so if you want to dump it onto an audio CD you render it down to 16bit / 44.1KHz. if you want to dump it into a movie you render it to 48KHz. etc etc etc. all the while you still have your 1bit master to keep top notch quality.
     
  17. djmukilteo

    djmukilteo Well-Known Member

    FWIW
    And I see this topic has gone way off....LOL
    No matter what digital conversion method is used, now or in the future...output filtering is what we all end up hearing with our ears.
    I would think output filtering should be the stage of interest in terms or perception and monitoring.
    How smooth and how accurate is the final analog audio output relative to the original source.
    No matter how many bit(s) are used to capture the source, playback is still the real world analog end result...
     
  18. Link555

    Link555 Well-Known Member

    lol oh I get you now. That would not be a wave, it would be part of a wave. Ok so I am trying to get your post....

    so when you say the flat part of the wave you mean a zero crossing with no DC offset. I am assuming your square moves from 0Vdc to some postive value.

    Then yes the part is correct, the speaker only moves when you have a postive or negative signal.


    No beacuse the square wave will move the speaker.

    No. The sound happen when the speaker moves in an out making sound waves out of air molecules. A static DC level on the speaker will hold the speaker in one spot yes, but the a square wave changes voltages at a specfic frequency. The speaker moves with this wave.
     
  19. djmukilteo

    djmukilteo Well-Known Member

    DC sounds cool!

    DC to Light and beyond
     
  20. Link555

    Link555 Well-Known Member

    Thanks but I am still trying to understand this, how do you tell what amplitute your analog wave is at with only one bit of resolution?
     

Share This Page