Wieder einmal kommt eine interessante Meldung zu dem Thema: Brauchen wir wirklich Musik über 20 kHz oder braucht das nur die Industrie?
Aus der Newsgrpoup: rec.audio.opinion von Arny Krueger 14.11.2003 - 14.00 Uhr
Re: Failure to hear the removal of sounds > 20 kHz
Over the years various people on RAO have berated me because I have kept saying that the fact that the CD format removes all sound above 22 kHz isn't a problem. Here is one more example in a long series of scientific papers that agree with this idea:
Audio Engineering Society Convention Paper 5876: Perceptual Discrimination between Musical Sounds with and without Very High Frequency Components Given at the 115th AES Convention in New York about a month ago. This paper can be ordered from the AES web site: www.aes.org
This paper describes the test methodology and the results of a series of listening tests performed by researchers at NHK Science & Technical Research Laboratories, Tokyo, Japan. These tests compared the playback of recordings with and without audio signals above 21 kHz.
19 different musical selections and one synthetic sound were used:
1 "Satsuma-Biwa" "Satsuma-Biwa"
2 Litha Drums, Bass, Pf (Jazz Piano Trio)
3 Meditation Vn, Pf
4 Romanian Folk Dances Vn, Pf
5 Intermezzo de "Carmen" Fl, Pf
6 Beethoven: Sym. No.9 4th Mov. Picc
7 Bach: Suite for Vc No.2 - Prelude Sax
8 Bach: Suite for Vc No.6 - Prelude Sax
9 Piece en forme de Habanera Sax, Pf
10 Partie Sax, Pf, Perc
11 Sednalo Bulgarian Chorus (SACD ARHS-1002)
12 TihViatar Bulgarian Chorus (SACD ARHS-1002)
13 Meditation+White Noise Vn, Pf, High frequency band consists of only white
noise.
14 Airs Valagues Fl, Pf
15 Tchaikovski: Sym. No.6 3rd Mov. Full Orchestra
16 Doralice Vo, Gt (Bossa Nova)
17 Chega de Sauadade Vo, Gt, Pf, Perc (Bossa Nova)
18 tiny rose Vo, Pf, Gt, Fl, Perc ("the birds")
19 butterfly Vo, Pf, Gt, Perc ("the birds")
20 Autumn Leaves Drums, Bass, Pf (Jazz Piano Trio)
"First, 36 subjects evaluated 20 kinds of stimulus, and each stimulus was evaluated 40 times in total. The results showed no significant difference among the sound stimuli, but that the correct response rate for three sound stimuli was close to the significance probability (5% level). It is concluded that one subject attained a 75% correct response rate which constituted a significant difference. In order to make a strict statistical test, we conducted a supplementary test with this subject who had attained the best correct answer rate in the first test. This subject evaluated six kinds of sound stimulus, and then evaluated each sound stimulus 20 times. As a result, no significant difference was found among the sound stimuli, and so this subject could not discriminate between these sound stimuli with and without very high frequency components."
In other words, of 36 listeners, only one listener scored substantially better than random guessing, and when retested, he could not duplicate his earlier results. This indicates that they were due to luck. In fact a study of statisitics and actual experience suggests that with a group of 36 listeners, it is pretty certain that one or more listeners will get good scores due to luck, that they won't be able to duplicate when re-tested.
So, you can flip pennies or compare 24/44 to 24/96 and get pretty much the same results, provided you hold all other relevant variables equal.
Wieder einmal ein Hinweis auf den Unsinn, Signale über 20 kHz aufzunehmen und zu speichern.
Micha
Aus der Newsgrpoup: rec.audio.opinion von Arny Krueger 14.11.2003 - 14.00 Uhr
Re: Failure to hear the removal of sounds > 20 kHz
Over the years various people on RAO have berated me because I have kept saying that the fact that the CD format removes all sound above 22 kHz isn't a problem. Here is one more example in a long series of scientific papers that agree with this idea:
Audio Engineering Society Convention Paper 5876: Perceptual Discrimination between Musical Sounds with and without Very High Frequency Components Given at the 115th AES Convention in New York about a month ago. This paper can be ordered from the AES web site: www.aes.org
This paper describes the test methodology and the results of a series of listening tests performed by researchers at NHK Science & Technical Research Laboratories, Tokyo, Japan. These tests compared the playback of recordings with and without audio signals above 21 kHz.
19 different musical selections and one synthetic sound were used:
1 "Satsuma-Biwa" "Satsuma-Biwa"
2 Litha Drums, Bass, Pf (Jazz Piano Trio)
3 Meditation Vn, Pf
4 Romanian Folk Dances Vn, Pf
5 Intermezzo de "Carmen" Fl, Pf
6 Beethoven: Sym. No.9 4th Mov. Picc
7 Bach: Suite for Vc No.2 - Prelude Sax
8 Bach: Suite for Vc No.6 - Prelude Sax
9 Piece en forme de Habanera Sax, Pf
10 Partie Sax, Pf, Perc
11 Sednalo Bulgarian Chorus (SACD ARHS-1002)
12 TihViatar Bulgarian Chorus (SACD ARHS-1002)
13 Meditation+White Noise Vn, Pf, High frequency band consists of only white
noise.
14 Airs Valagues Fl, Pf
15 Tchaikovski: Sym. No.6 3rd Mov. Full Orchestra
16 Doralice Vo, Gt (Bossa Nova)
17 Chega de Sauadade Vo, Gt, Pf, Perc (Bossa Nova)
18 tiny rose Vo, Pf, Gt, Fl, Perc ("the birds")
19 butterfly Vo, Pf, Gt, Perc ("the birds")
20 Autumn Leaves Drums, Bass, Pf (Jazz Piano Trio)
"First, 36 subjects evaluated 20 kinds of stimulus, and each stimulus was evaluated 40 times in total. The results showed no significant difference among the sound stimuli, but that the correct response rate for three sound stimuli was close to the significance probability (5% level). It is concluded that one subject attained a 75% correct response rate which constituted a significant difference. In order to make a strict statistical test, we conducted a supplementary test with this subject who had attained the best correct answer rate in the first test. This subject evaluated six kinds of sound stimulus, and then evaluated each sound stimulus 20 times. As a result, no significant difference was found among the sound stimuli, and so this subject could not discriminate between these sound stimuli with and without very high frequency components."
In other words, of 36 listeners, only one listener scored substantially better than random guessing, and when retested, he could not duplicate his earlier results. This indicates that they were due to luck. In fact a study of statisitics and actual experience suggests that with a group of 36 listeners, it is pretty certain that one or more listeners will get good scores due to luck, that they won't be able to duplicate when re-tested.
So, you can flip pennies or compare 24/44 to 24/96 and get pretty much the same results, provided you hold all other relevant variables equal.
Wieder einmal ein Hinweis auf den Unsinn, Signale über 20 kHz aufzunehmen und zu speichern.
Micha