Check this out. I first heard about this several years ago when I read an article in the now defunct BAM Magazine where Neil Young said almost the same thing.
The following is an excerpt from an article by Rupert Neve, published in the October 2002 issue of Audio Media in AM Forum.
"I first met SCAD in 1995 in Tokyo when I visited Professor Oohashi at the Japanese Institute for Mass Communication. The equipment I listened to was made for Professor Oohashi by JVC. He had presented papers, claiming that extension of the frequency range beyond audibility was beneficial to sound quality and produced brain electrical activity from the area associated with pleasure. The absence of frequencies above 20 kHz resulted in subliminal frustration and restlessness."
Now of course this is being remedied by higher sample rates but Mr. Neve goes on to say that it is still a problem until you reach rates of 192 or higher. SCAD / DSD of course is beyond all this. Food for thought. Fats
Topic Tags
Comments
Well a 96 K sampling rate will give you about 48k playback. In t
Well a 96 K sampling rate will give you about 48k playback. In the same article Mr. Neve sites an incident where famed Beatles engineer Geoff Emerick was bothered by the presence of a 3dB peak @ 54kHz on a console that Neve had delivered to him! Although we don't really hear that high we can feel it and our brains detect it. With 2" analog the high freqs roll off starting at about 24 k or so (depending on the machine) but there is still stuff going on way up there albeit down 20 dB or so, but it's still there. That's why analog is better! Fats
What brand was it that Rupert likes a lot, was it JVC or Pioneer
What brand was it that Rupert likes a lot, was it JVC or Pioneer. I remember reading something in tapeop about how he said thier engineers really know about distortion and bandwidth and their products show this, sonically. I think it was JVC.
Anyone remember which one it was?
Will all due respect to Mr Neve, I think the dude is losing some
Will all due respect to Mr Neve, I think the dude is losing some marbles. That or trying to fool the world. I read an article where he actually blamed CD's for violence among the youth. I highly doubt "the youth" miss tape hiss so much that they feel a need to riot. Yet more digital voodoo... Shesh, were does it end?
Most decent speakers will have some ability to reproduce ultra h
Most decent speakers will have some ability to reproduce ultra high freqs, maybe down 30 dB but it's still there. I think it probably generates harmonics in the lower freqs that we can sense.
16 /44.1 nothing at all over 20k! It's an unnatural roll off very drastic and it freaks me out. Really, talk about speakers that are fatiguing. Digital just wears me out after 6 hours. Fats
I think it probably generates harmonics in the lower freqs that
I think it probably generates harmonics in the lower freqs that we can sense.
That's what makes sense (no pun) . I have the same feeling . No matter what others say , I have always felt a loss when I transfered analog tape to digital .There's more to tape than distortion and compression . Specs are not sound . We might found out we've been measuring the wrong thing ; Sony People were at Studio Mega in Paris because there was a mix in SACD format and they said that so far the best results they had were with analog (even against high freq rates/High resolution)
According to my B&K mics, calibrated (10 to 60K), and My Dog to
According to my B&K mics, calibrated (10 to 60K), and My Dog to help, I can reproduce within +/-10 dB
9hZ to 76K easy.
Miss Maddie (My Terrier) turns her head when I put 76K on, but at 85K she does not. This is at an average of 60dBA not high level. The 9hZ does take 70 dB to be flat.
I do not test ultra high frequncy above usually 75K for fear of roasted tweeters and amplifiers. My Amp is rated 1 dB down at 350KHZ and the speaker wires are certifyed to 1 meghZ. Flat at any load or voltage below 675 Volts, hardly my amps limit of 104 v/pk AC output /1 ohm.
Speakers:
They are flat to 18hZ though..without rolloff at all, less than 1dB. Design standard to be flat to 23K/40 degrees off center -0.5dB but my Dog knows they get way up there. At almost 44 years old, I only hear tones to 16.5K I hope that is good. I remember hearing 25K as a 16 year old clearly..with an osscilator. Not cranked either..it simply died at 25 with a tweeter that measured flat to 32KhZ
Go high end, not junk and it can happen.
Originally posted by Cedar Flat Fats: With 2" analog the high
Originally posted by Cedar Flat Fats:
With 2" analog the high freqs roll off starting at about 24 k or so (depending on the machine) but there is still stuff going on way up there albeit down 20 dB or so, but it's still there. That's why analog is better! Fats
My Otari 2" 24tr. has no problem recording 35 kHz.
I recorded on a Telefunken M15 (2" 16 tr) last monday and this sound is so incredably good that I am sure there will never be any digital format that will sound as good as 2" 16, period!
Peace, Han
My Otari 2" 24tr. has no problem recording 35 kHz. I recorded on
My Otari 2" 24tr. has no problem recording 35 kHz. I recorded on a Telefunken M15 (2" 16 tr) last monday and this sound is so incredably good that I am sure there will never be any digital format that will sound as good as 2" 16, period! Peace, Han
at 30 IPS miles of surface! Lots of maintainance? ;) ......Fats
Rupert Sezz; "extension of the frequency range beyond audibili
Rupert Sezz;
"extension of the frequency range beyond audibility was beneficial to sound quality and produced brain electrical activity from the area associated with pleasure The absence of frequencies above 20 kHz resulted in subliminal frustration and restlessness."
Audiomedia.com....It should post next month. They don't post the
Audiomedia.com....It should post next month. They don't post their most recent issues until the next one comes out....Fats
___________________________________________________________________________________
"The extension of the frequency range beyond audibility is beneficial to sound quality and produces brain electrical activity from the area associated with pleasure. The absence of frequencies above 20 kHz result in subliminal frustration and restlessness."
Getting back to the original question, "Why 24 / 96 Digital Stil
Getting back to the original question, "Why 24 / 96 Digital Still Sucks!", the answer is that it doesn't have to. Hell, a pair of great mics, into good preamps into some top converters and even 16/44 can sound great. But 99.95% of digital recording doesn't resemble that in anyway. Instead of recording a complete performance and handing it off to a qualified mastering house, engineers spend months tweaking (and ruining) their recordings with countless processing steps, each having detrimental effects of varying degrees. By the time their done moving snare beats around, even a 24/192 recording sounds like crap. Funny, but my "live to dat" recordings sound fine........ and I'm a hardcore analog guy.
steve
lex125@pacbell.net
I took a 2" 24 track master and mixed it through an MCI 600 cons
I took a 2" 24 track master and mixed it through an MCI 600 console, monitoring the 2 mix bus. I Took the 2 track #1 out of the console to the A to D inputs of an Apogee PSX 100 @24 /96, monitoring the PSX 100's D to A outs on the 2 trk # 2 return on the console tape returns. Switching between the digital and analog the differences was obvious even to an untrained listener. Even at 96k there is a collapse of the stereo difference resulting in loss of perceived depth and a noticeable lack of "air"and openness. It feels as if the ceiling has been lowered. The average listener or musician /engineer doesn't ever get an opportunity to make this kind of comparison. Since the final delivery is on 16 / 44, one could argue "What's the point?" I'm not saying that you can't make a good recording on digital. I'm saying it's not the best thing ever. Analog is still better. Less fatiguing too!
Fats
Hollywood Steve said; Hell, a pair of great mics, into goo
Hollywood Steve said;
Hell, a pair of great mics, into good preamps into some top converters and even 16/44 can sound great. But 99.95% of digital recording doesn't resemble that in anyway. Instead of recording a complete performance and handing it off to a qualified mastering house, engineers spend months tweaking (and ruining) their recordings with countless processing steps, each having detrimental effects of varying degrees. By the time their done moving snare beats around, even a 24/192 recording sounds like crap. Funny, but my "live to dat" recordings sound fine........ and I'm a hardcore analog guy.
A valid point, but the whole selling point of digital is supposed to be the ability to manipulate the audio without degradation. Are the OEM's selling us a crock? Fats
Fats, you made a comment about comparing 24/96 to analog:
Fats, you made a comment about comparing 24/96 to analog:
Switching between the digital and analog the differences was obvious even to an untrained listener
Then later you refer to the final product being at 16/44.1 for CD use. I would like to see you take your comparison one step further, and dither both of those takes down to 16/44.1,, burning them down to a CD, and *then* comparing them. Since the final destination (in most cases) is a 16/44.1 CD...
Did that, Came down to 24 / 48, 16 / 48 and 16 / 44.1, eac
Did that,
Came down to 24 / 48, 16 / 48 and 16 / 44.1, each step down losing more definition with the difference between 16/48 and 16/44.1 being just different, rather that a loss of quality issue. Apogee UV22 dither helped a bit to retain dynamics. I haven't been able to do a 192 comparison but I think that's about where it needs to go to be in the running but file sizes and storage are a big issue. IMO DSD seems to be the elegant approach....Fats
Hey CFF. Bandwidth thing not a joke. Very real. I work on a desk
Hey CFF. Bandwidth thing not a joke. Very real. I work on a desk that's ruler flat 10-215Khz every single day. Rupert designed it. Upward AND downward 'Reinforcement' of harmonic partials. My cock-a-mamie theory. Don't know what it is. Once you get used to it, you're doomed. New SSL XL has yet ANOTHER extension of bandwidth from the J series. Why would they bother? 'Cause the old man has got it going on. That's why. :D
The following is an excerpt from the much talked about On Line C
The following is an excerpt from the much talked about On Line Chat with Mr. Rupert Neve, Fletcher of Mercenary Audio fame moderating.....(as it pertains to this thread).
Fletcher: "There has been some measure of debate about bandwidth including frequencies above 20kHz, can we hear them, do they make a difference, etc.?"
Rupert: "OK, Fletch, pin your ears back...back in 1977, just after I had sold the company,
George Martin called me to say that Air Studios had taken delivery of a Neve Console which did not seem to be giving satisfaction to Geoff Emmerick. In fact, he said that Geoff is unhappy.... engineers from the company, bear in mind that at this point I was not primarily involved, had visited the studio and reported that nothing was wrong. They said that the customer is mad and that the problem will go away if we ignore it long enough.
Well I visited the studio and after careful listening with Geoff, I agreed with him that three panels on this 48 panel console sounded slightly different. We discovered that there was a 3 dB peak at 54kHz Geoff's golden ears had perceived that there was a difference. We found that 3 transformers had been incorrectly wired and it was a matter of minutes to correct this. After which Geoff was happy. And I mean that he relaxed and there was a big smile on his face.
As you can imagine a lot of theories were put forward, but even today I couldn't tell you how an experienced listener can perceive frequencies of the normal range of hearing.
And following on from this, I was visiting Japan and was invited to the laboratories of
Professor Oohashi He had discovered that when filters were applied to an audio signal
cutting off frequencies of 20 kHz, the brain started to emit electric signals which can be
measured and quantified
These signals were at the frequencies and of the pattern which are associated with
frustration and anger. Clearly we discussed this at some length and I also would forward the idea that any frequencies which were not part of the original music, such as quantisizing noise produced by compact discs and other digital sources, also produced similar brain waves."
16 /44.1 nothing at all over 22k! It's an unnatural roll off very drastic and it freaks me out. Really, talk about speakers that are fatiguing. Digital just wears me out after 6 hours. Fats
This is what I meant. I can do longer sessions in the same room before ear fatigue affects me when I am working in analog.....Fats
Pretty unfair to not post the full link :) I am busy mastering
Pretty unfair to not post the full link :) I am busy mastering and I would like to read on...and believe me, G's ears are FRIED, DYED, LAID on the SIDE, since the wingspan is so fucked up.
Fletch is making noise, agreed..but really, what has he done I can look at in the past 4 months. If he has some product out there (no time to keep up...hel I have not watched a mainstreme movie or know the names in actors and their roles for 24 years as well, so I am in the biz, blind to our friends as associates)
This profession has value, for the ones that are OUTSIDE the box, as well..IMHO.
Well my clients love me.......
Hmmmmmm.... This thread has got me thinking.Does anyone see a co
Hmmmmmm.... This thread has got me thinking.Does anyone see a correlation between the proliferation of the digital age and when music turned angry? ie.--all the angry rap,lost disalusioned grunge youth,all the bands that tune 5 steps down and yelp like pirates in to a bent up 58! (arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!)If we can identify the problem,why hasn't some designer put the lost harmonics back in there somehow? Just thiking......Barefoot
Does anyone see a correlation between the proliferation of the d
Does anyone see a correlation between the proliferation of the digital age and when music turned angry?
Sir! Put down the lighter and step away from the bong. :D :w:
There are Bartok pieces that will make the "Nu-Metal" hordes piss their pampers in terror. I also imagine that Richard Hell and Stiv Bators would take exception to your comment (if Stiv were still around that is).
"Does anyone see a correlation between the proliferation of the
"Does anyone see a correlation between the proliferation of the digital age and when music turned angry?" Barefoot
"Sir! Put down the lighter and step away from the bong. There are Bartok pieces that will make the "Nu-Metal" hordes piss their pampers in terror." Tom Cram
ruk ruk, that's funny....Fats :D
"The extension of the frequency range beyond audibility is beneficial to sound quality and produces brain electrical activity from the area associated with pleasure".
"The absence of frequencies above 20 kHz results in subliminal frustration and restlessness."
Rupert Neve
Actually,Bartok studied the folk music in the hills on Hungary.H
Actually,Bartok studied the folk music in the hills on Hungary.He was brilliant,but his music wasn't meant to be angry or scary,it just sounds like that to some who may not undestand.As quoted by John Mclaughlin-"Listen to any of Bartok's violin quartets and you will have enough solos to last a lifetime!"Wich brings me to my next point-Where have all the solos gone in the angry music? Has the lowering of the digital "Roof" coused them to become unsatisfying? Just a thought.
The following excerpts appeared in the November 2002 issue of Pr
The following excerpts appeared in the November 2002 issue of Pro Audio Review in an article by Ed Foster of Diversified Science Laboratories titled "The ABC's of SACD and PCM."
The Ears Have It
"When a click is presented binaurally over headphones, the average person can distinguish an interaural delay of 15 microseconds. Some reportedly have been able to discern differences of 3 to 5 microseconds. …A 44.1 kHz sampling rate provides new data every 22.67 microseconds....192kHz sampling updates every 5.2 microseconds. Is that good enough?"
Whatever the arguments IMHO digital music is fatiguing because
Whatever the arguments IMHO digital music is fatiguing because its essentially chopped and shaped. Maybe our 'cerebral decoding' is cleverer than we think, with digital tiring the brain out trying to fix it! :( ).
Digital is now so far advanced that there is no going back but my pipedream is that someone someday somewhere will find a new way of capturing the whole and not just the parts :D hopefully in time to store many of the remaining valuable analog-era master tapes before they crumble and are lost forever and before god help us..even worse... backed up to digital. ;)
:w: :w: :w:
"Mr. Neve goes on to say that it is still a problem until you re
"Mr. Neve goes on to say that it is still a problem until you reach rates of 192 or higher"... This statement confuses me. Shouldnt a samling rate of 96k extend the frequency responce well above 20khz (to 48khz to be exact) mabey im missing something.