Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
High Def Formats again
Hi Guys,
Since I now finally have a HD player I like to buy HD material. There is a possibility to buy HD tracks on line. However when I open such a file with "Audacity" I don't SEE any frequency above 20 kHz, but I must admit I did not totally analyze this data I just looked at it in the graphics of Audacity. But I still wonder if any of these tracks actually contains frequencies above 20 kHz. What do you guys make of this? Any of you have a source for HD which has music information above 20kHz? Let me make clear that I don't want to start whether or not higher frequencies are audible, only that HD music should have recorded higher frequencies in the first place. Edmund |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
High Def Formats again
On Apr 20, 8:47=A0am, Edmund wrote:
Hi Guys, Since I now finally have a HD player I like to buy HD material. There is = a possibility to buy HD tracks on line. However when I open such a file wit= h "Audacity" I don't SEE any frequency above 20 kHz, but I must admit I did not totally analyze this data I just looked at it in the graphics of Auda= city. But I still wonder if any of these tracks actually contains frequencies a= bov 20 kHz. There are a number of reasons why there is a lack of energy at these very high frequencies. Microphones commonly used to make the recordings often do not get much above 15 KHz such as the SM58. The human voice certainly is frequency limited and most musical instruments have little harmonic content above 20 KHz. You might want to look at recordings that feature the percussion section of the orchestra since here you will find instruments like cymbals that will be very rich in harmonic content. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
High Def Formats again
"Edmund" wrote in message
Hi Guys, Since I now finally have a HD player I like to buy HD material. There is a possibility to buy HD tracks on line. However when I open such a file with "Audacity" I don't SEE any frequency above 20 kHz, but I must admit I did not totally analyze this data I just looked at it in the graphics of Audacity. But I still wonder if any of these tracks actually contains frequencies above 20 kHz. What do you guys make of this? Many so-called hi definition recordings are actually 24/96 or 24/192 transcriptions of analog tapes and 16/44 or 16/48 masters. Analog tapes were ususally made at 15 ips which pretty well eliminates response above 25-30 KHz. Any of you have a source for HD which has music information above 20kHz? As Jwvm correctly points out, nature abhors the creating of true hi def recordings. His list of reasons is good and relevant. Let me make clear that I don't want to start whether or not higher frequencies are audible, only that HD music should have recorded higher frequencies in the first place. I agree that it is very nice when so-called hi def tracks are actually hi def! ;-) |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
High Def Formats again
"jwvm" wrote in message
On Apr 20, 8:47 am, Edmund wrote: Hi Guys, Since I now finally have a HD player I like to buy HD material. There is a possibility to buy HD tracks on line. However when I open such a file with "Audacity" I don't SEE any frequency above 20 kHz, but I must admit I did not totally analyze this data I just looked at it in the graphics of Audacity. But I still wonder if any of these tracks actually contains frequencies abov 20 kHz. There are a number of reasons why there is a lack of energy at these very high frequencies. Microphones commonly used to make the recordings often do not get much above 15 KHz such as the SM58. You're being generous. The response curve of the SM57/58 and many mics like it is on a fairly steep downward slope starting as low as 8-9 KHz. The human voice certainly is frequency limited and most musical instruments have little harmonic content above 20 KHz. This is true in many cases, but not so true in other cases. James Boyk explains the exceptions quite eloquently and with a lot of real world evidence in: http://www.its.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm You might want to look at recordings that feature the percussion section of the orchestra since here you will find instruments like cymbals that will be very rich in harmonic content. Cymbals generally have their peak output in the 7-9 Khz range and roll off steeply above that. One other strong factor is the fact that high frequencies encounter a lot of loss while being transmitted through the air. Reference: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-air.htm Example: At 10 KHz, standard room temperature and 50% RH, the attenuation due to air is 16 dB per 100 meters. Another example: At 20 KHz, 25 degrees C, 50% RH, the attenuation due to air is 47 dB per 100 meters. Finally, at 40 KHz, 30 degrees C and 50% RH, the attenuation due to air is 134 dB per 100 meters. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
High Def Formats again
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:13:16 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ): "Edmund" wrote in message Hi Guys, Since I now finally have a HD player I like to buy HD material. There is a possibility to buy HD tracks on line. However when I open such a file with "Audacity" I don't SEE any frequency above 20 kHz, but I must admit I did not totally analyze this data I just looked at it in the graphics of Audacity. But I still wonder if any of these tracks actually contains frequencies above 20 kHz. What do you guys make of this? Many so-called hi definition recordings are actually 24/96 or 24/192 transcriptions of analog tapes and 16/44 or 16/48 masters. Analog tapes were ususally made at 15 ips which pretty well eliminates response above 25-30 KHz. Actually, it's difficult to maintain even a pro 15 ips analog tape recorder to much above 15 kHz. Self erasure, poor head contact at ultra-short wavelengths all make analog tape "iffy" at much above 15 khz. Back in analog days, most studios only maintained their tape decks to 15Khz. More than that took too long and wasn't practical. Before I recorded the SF Symphony back in the 1970's I would carefully align both Otari MX5050s for head azimuth, bias, frequency response, and Dolby 'A' level AFTER I set up the equipment (the tape recorder was not moved after that). I never tried to get response beyond 15 Khz, but I scrupulously maintained the recorders to that level. Any of you have a source for HD which has music information above 20kHz? Not really. Let's say that the recording was made at 24 or 32- bit and 192 KHz (or perhaps DSD). The recording equipment might have that kind of bandwidth, but I'll guarantee that the microphones used don't. Most condenser mikes fall-off like a rock above the resonant frequency of their diaphragms - and that is usually 16 -18 Khz. Not much there above those frequencies. Doesn't matter, though. You likely wouldn't be able to hear it anyway. As Jwvm correctly points out, nature abhors the creating of true hi def recordings. His list of reasons is good and relevant. Let me make clear that I don't want to start whether or not higher frequencies are audible, only that HD music should have recorded higher frequencies in the first place. Why would it? A chain is only as strong as its weakest length. In the case of recording, as elsewhere in audio, the weakest length is always the transducers - speakers, phono cartridges, microphones. In this case it's microphones. I agree that it is very nice when so-called hi def tracks are actually hi def! ;-) The hi-def doesn't refer to recordings filled with extraneous and inaudible ultra-high-frequency information, it refers to the fact that the bandwidth of the medium is wide enough that only gentle slope filters, located high above the highest audible frequency, need to be employed on either end of the the chain (recording and playback) to satisfy Nyquist. Many insist that this sounds better. Certainly, recording information that only small dogs can hear is of no use to most humans in and of itself. The advantage (if any) is in the process of recording and playing back with a very high sampling rate, not the information that such a sampling rate is capable of quantizing. Hint, if any part of high-resolution recording is beneficial, its the word length (24 or 32-bits) not the sampling rate. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
help with recording formats | Pro Audio | |||
Mac -PC Video Formats | Pro Audio | |||
CD audio formats | High End Audio | |||
Playlist formats | Pro Audio | |||
need converter from dp3 or dp4 formats to wav or ses formats | Pro Audio |