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.

FABRICATOR!!! (Sorry, couldn't resist)

FABRICATOR!!! (Sorry, couldn't resist)

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what extent
high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what extent
high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots that
clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that were captured
in the program material.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots that
clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that were captured
in the program material.

Arny Krueger wrote:
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 .


If/when this is published, it'd be interesting to see how the authors
reconcile their results with Oohashi's.

Do they do so in the convention paper? It doesn't appear to available yet
on the aes site "The AES Preprints database is now complete
through convention #114."



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.





--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Arny Krueger wrote:
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 .


If/when this is published, it'd be interesting to see how the authors
reconcile their results with Oohashi's.

Do they do so in the convention paper? It doesn't appear to available yet
on the aes site "The AES Preprints database is now complete
through convention #114."



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.





--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots that
clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that were captured
in the program material.

What sort of A/B comparison protocol was used, and what was the interval
between A and B?



--
-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots that
clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that were captured
in the program material.

What sort of A/B comparison protocol was used, and what was the interval
between A and B?



--
-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

What sort of A/B comparison protocol was used,

ABC/hr

and what was the interval between A and B?

Apparently, vanishingly short. Listeners controlled their own switching and
preferred volume levels.

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

What sort of A/B comparison protocol was used,

ABC/hr

and what was the interval between A and B?

Apparently, vanishingly short. Listeners controlled their own switching and
preferred volume levels.

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

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 .

If/when this is published, it'd be interesting to see how the authors
reconcile their results with Oohashi's.

They reference it.

"From these results, we can still neither confirm nor
deny the possibility that some subjects could
discriminate between musical sounds with and
without very high frequency components. It is
therefore necessary to conduct further repetitive
evaluation tests with many subjects and various
sound stimuli that contain sufficient very high
frequency components, in order to examine these
issues more strictly.

"Nevertheless, the results also showed that the test
system is entirely reliable, and can exclude any
leakage or distortion in the audible frequency range
caused by the very high frequency components.
Further evaluation tests using this test system will
therefore accurately show whether the very high
frequency components in sound stimuli affect human
recognition of sound quality.


Do they do so in the convention paper?

Not specifically.

It doesn't appear to available yet on the aes site "The AES Preprints
database is now complete
through convention #114."

Hmmm. You might try begging a copy of the convention paper from one of the
authors:

Toshiyuki Nishiguchi, Kimio Hamasaki, Masakazu Iwaki, and Akio Ando NHK
Science & Technical Research Laboratories, Tokyo, 157-8510, Japan

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

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 .

If/when this is published, it'd be interesting to see how the authors
reconcile their results with Oohashi's.

They reference it.

"From these results, we can still neither confirm nor
deny the possibility that some subjects could
discriminate between musical sounds with and
without very high frequency components. It is
therefore necessary to conduct further repetitive
evaluation tests with many subjects and various
sound stimuli that contain sufficient very high
frequency components, in order to examine these
issues more strictly.

"Nevertheless, the results also showed that the test
system is entirely reliable, and can exclude any
leakage or distortion in the audible frequency range
caused by the very high frequency components.
Further evaluation tests using this test system will
therefore accurately show whether the very high
frequency components in sound stimuli affect human
recognition of sound quality.


Do they do so in the convention paper?

Not specifically.

It doesn't appear to available yet on the aes site "The AES Preprints
database is now complete
through convention #114."

Hmmm. You might try begging a copy of the convention paper from one of the
authors:

Toshiyuki Nishiguchi, Kimio Hamasaki, Masakazu Iwaki, and Akio Ando NHK
Science & Technical Research Laboratories, Tokyo, 157-8510, Japan

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

What sort of A/B comparison protocol was used,

ABC/hr

and what was the interval between A and B?

Apparently, vanishingly short. Listeners controlled their own switching and
preferred volume levels.

Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec are required
between A and B in order to eliminate physiological interference from the
initial signal (in contradiction to most of what's known about audible memory),
then these results can be questioned.



--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

What sort of A/B comparison protocol was used,

ABC/hr

and what was the interval between A and B?

Apparently, vanishingly short. Listeners controlled their own switching and
preferred volume levels.

Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec are required
between A and B in order to eliminate physiological interference from the
initial signal (in contradiction to most of what's known about audible memory),
then these results can be questioned.



--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec
are required between A and B in order to eliminate physiological
interference from the initial signal (in contradiction to most of
what's known about audible memory), then these results can be
questioned.

Most of the questioning I hear targets Oohashi et al. I don't know of anyone
who takes them too seriously. After all they did those tests that claimed
audible differences solely due to response 20 KHz, while their measured
results show variations 20 KHz.

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec
are required between A and B in order to eliminate physiological
interference from the initial signal (in contradiction to most of
what's known about audible memory), then these results can be
questioned.

Most of the questioning I hear targets Oohashi et al. I don't know of anyone
who takes them too seriously. After all they did those tests that claimed
audible differences solely due to response 20 KHz, while their measured
results show variations 20 KHz.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots that
clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that were captured
in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artefact but here are two sinus tones recorded
at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

T

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots that
clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that were captured
in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artefact but here are two sinus tones recorded
at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

T

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec
are required between A and B in order to eliminate physiological
interference from the initial signal (in contradiction to most of
what's known about audible memory), then these results can be
questioned.

Most of the questioning I hear targets Oohashi et al. I don't know of anyone
who takes them too seriously.


I know of one fellow who is taking them extremely seriously, over on RAHE.

After all they did those tests that claimed
audible differences solely due to response 20 KHz, while their measured
results show variations 20 KHz.

Yes, but they claim to have found a difference when the 20 kHz frequencies
were added to the 20 kHz stuff. Just how this comes about, they aren't too
clear on.

I would liek to see someone replicate the experiments; when odd results
come out of only one lab, it raises a flag for me.




--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec
are required between A and B in order to eliminate physiological
interference from the initial signal (in contradiction to most of
what's known about audible memory), then these results can be
questioned.

Most of the questioning I hear targets Oohashi et al. I don't know of anyone
who takes them too seriously.


I know of one fellow who is taking them extremely seriously, over on RAHE.

After all they did those tests that claimed
audible differences solely due to response 20 KHz, while their measured
results show variations 20 KHz.

Yes, but they claim to have found a difference when the 20 kHz frequencies
were added to the 20 kHz stuff. Just how this comes about, they aren't too
clear on.

I would liek to see someone replicate the experiments; when odd results
come out of only one lab, it raises a flag for me.




--

-S.

"They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason."
-- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec
are required between A and B in order to eliminate physiological
interference from the initial signal (in contradiction to most of
what's known about audible memory), then these results can be
questioned.

Most of the questioning I hear targets Oohashi et al. I don't know
of anyone who takes them too seriously.


I know of one fellow who is taking them extremely seriously, over on
RAHE.

IME RAHE and "serious" are foreign concepts. I appreciate those who fight
the good fight against denial of the obvious as practiced by the golden ears
over there, but...

After all they did those tests that claimed
audible differences solely due to response 20 KHz, while their
measured results show variations 20 KHz.

Yes, but they claim to have found a difference when the 20 kHz
frequencies were added to the 20 kHz stuff. Just how this comes
about, they aren't too clear on.

I debunked the Oohashi paper on RAHE, but the usual list of suspects are
still in denial. They are in denial about everything.

I would like to see someone replicate the experiments; when odd
results come out of only one lab, it raises a flag for me.

The bottom line is that there are several far more straightforward ways to
study the same issue, and they agree with the paper that started this
thread: 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 .

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message


Well, if Oohashi et al are right, and intervals of at least 10 sec
are required between A and B in order to eliminate physiological
interference from the initial signal (in contradiction to most of
what's known about audible memory), then these results can be
questioned.

Most of the questioning I hear targets Oohashi et al. I don't know
of anyone who takes them too seriously.


I know of one fellow who is taking them extremely seriously, over on
RAHE.

IME RAHE and "serious" are foreign concepts. I appreciate those who fight
the good fight against denial of the obvious as practiced by the golden ears
over there, but...

After all they did those tests that claimed
audible differences solely due to response 20 KHz, while their
measured results show variations 20 KHz.

Yes, but they claim to have found a difference when the 20 kHz
frequencies were added to the 20 kHz stuff. Just how this comes
about, they aren't too clear on.

I debunked the Oohashi paper on RAHE, but the usual list of suspects are
still in denial. They are in denial about everything.

I would like to see someone replicate the experiments; when odd
results come out of only one lab, it raises a flag for me.

The bottom line is that there are several far more straightforward ways to
study the same issue, and they agree with the paper that started this
thread: 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 .

"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones recorded
at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen to the
files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones recorded
at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen to the
files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones recorded
at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen to the
files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

Well since I don't have access to 24/96 I'm asking if such experiments
have been done. I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and
21 kHz, so what happens with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or
higher? Any research that shows that the 1 kHz tone is audible at
high-freqeuncy and what level of the fundamental tones are needed?
With complex music the Tartinis are probably masked by lower
fundamentals, but my question related to audibility of pure tones.

T

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones recorded
at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen to the
files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

Well since I don't have access to 24/96 I'm asking if such experiments
have been done. I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and
21 kHz, so what happens with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or
higher? Any research that shows that the 1 kHz tone is audible at
high-freqeuncy and what level of the fundamental tones are needed?
With complex music the Tartinis are probably masked by lower
fundamentals, but my question related to audibility of pure tones.

T

Thomas,

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and 21 kHz, so what happens
with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or higher?

This is a common misunderstanding. The only time sum and difference products
are created is in the presence of nonlinearity (distortion). Non-linearity
is far worse in mechanical devices like microphones and human ears. I
sometimes play percussion in the local symphony, and when I'm banging hard
on orchestra bell high notes, I often hear beat tones. But those are
generated IN MY EAR due to the high levels.

--Ethan

Thomas,

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and 21 kHz, so what happens
with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or higher?

This is a common misunderstanding. The only time sum and difference products
are created is in the presence of nonlinearity (distortion). Non-linearity
is far worse in mechanical devices like microphones and human ears. I
sometimes play percussion in the local symphony, and when I'm banging hard
on orchestra bell high notes, I often hear beat tones. But those are
generated IN MY EAR due to the high levels.

--Ethan

"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message ...
Thomas,

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and 21 kHz, so what happens
with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or higher?

This is a common misunderstanding. The only time sum and difference products
are created is in the presence of nonlinearity (distortion). Non-linearity
is far worse in mechanical devices like microphones and human ears. I
sometimes play percussion in the local symphony, and when I'm banging hard
on orchestra bell high notes, I often hear beat tones. But those are
generated IN MY EAR due to the high levels.

--Ethan


Yes, Tartinis are genereated as distortion by the ear in live
situations, but then it's part of what we should hear if a signal is
played through a reproduction system. Or? The question is from my side
if there is a limit in frequency where we no longer can percieve
Tartini tones. It's been difficult to find any litterature on this,
i.e. very high frequencies and the audbility of Tartini tones.

T

"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message ...
Thomas,

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and 21 kHz, so what happens
with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or higher?

This is a common misunderstanding. The only time sum and difference products
are created is in the presence of nonlinearity (distortion). Non-linearity
is far worse in mechanical devices like microphones and human ears. I
sometimes play percussion in the local symphony, and when I'm banging hard
on orchestra bell high notes, I often hear beat tones. But those are
generated IN MY EAR due to the high levels.

--Ethan


Yes, Tartinis are genereated as distortion by the ear in live
situations, but then it's part of what we should hear if a signal is
played through a reproduction system. Or? The question is from my side
if there is a limit in frequency where we no longer can percieve
Tartini tones. It's been difficult to find any litterature on this,
i.e. very high frequencies and the audbility of Tartini tones.

T

"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program
material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones
recorded at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen
to the files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

Well since I don't have access to 24/96 I'm asking if such experiments
have been done.

Based on download statistics, thousands of them over the past 3 years.

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and
21 kHz, so what happens with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or
higher?


Your milage may vary depending on a number of other variables. However the
effect is irrelevant to the experience of listening to music for pleasure.

Any research that shows that the 1 kHz tone is audible at
high-freqeuncy and what level of the fundamental tones are needed?

The level of high frequency energy required to stimulate nonlinearities in
order to cause spurious responses in the audible range to be heard with
typical music is too high.

With complex music the Tartinis are probably masked by lower
fundamentals, but my question related to audibility of pure tones.

The levels required are irrelevant to the experience of listening to music.

"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program
material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones
recorded at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen
to the files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

Well since I don't have access to 24/96 I'm asking if such experiments
have been done.

Based on download statistics, thousands of them over the past 3 years.

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and
21 kHz, so what happens with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or
higher?


Your milage may vary depending on a number of other variables. However the
effect is irrelevant to the experience of listening to music for pleasure.

Any research that shows that the 1 kHz tone is audible at
high-freqeuncy and what level of the fundamental tones are needed?

The level of high frequency energy required to stimulate nonlinearities in
order to cause spurious responses in the audible range to be heard with
typical music is too high.

With complex music the Tartinis are probably masked by lower
fundamentals, but my question related to audibility of pure tones.

The levels required are irrelevant to the experience of listening to music.

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

much snipped

Just want to give two more examples:

A pure 15 kHz tone:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/15khz.wav

A 15 kHz + 21 kHz tone:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/15_21kHz.wav

At high level the beat and Tartini tone can be heard (6 kHz). The 15
+ 21 kHz is percieved "smoother" even if played at much higher volume
than the single 15 kHz tone in my ears.

T

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

much snipped

Just want to give two more examples:

A pure 15 kHz tone:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/15khz.wav

A 15 kHz + 21 kHz tone:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/15_21kHz.wav

At high level the beat and Tartini tone can be heard (6 kHz). The 15
+ 21 kHz is percieved "smoother" even if played at much higher volume
than the single 15 kHz tone in my ears.

T

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program
material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones
recorded at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen
to the files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

Well since I don't have access to 24/96 I'm asking if such experiments
have been done.

Based on download statistics, thousands of them over the past 3 years.

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and
21 kHz, so what happens with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or
higher?


Your milage may vary depending on a number of other variables. However the
effect is irrelevant to the experience of listening to music for pleasure..

Any research that shows that the 1 kHz tone is audible at
high-freqeuncy and what level of the fundamental tones are needed?

The level of high frequency energy required to stimulate nonlinearities in
order to cause spurious responses in the audible range to be heard with
typical music is too high.

With complex music the Tartinis are probably masked by lower
fundamentals, but my question related to audibility of pure tones.

The levels required are irrelevant to the experience of listening to music.


Yes probably so, but since it is impossible to prove with 100%
certainty that it is inaudible with every possible music signal
available, one can argue that the frequency limits should be set where
they are inaudible from the true source, whatever the signal is.

T

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to what
extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program
material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral plots
that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency sounds that
were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency are
they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones
recorded at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen
to the files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

Well since I don't have access to 24/96 I'm asking if such experiments
have been done.

Based on download statistics, thousands of them over the past 3 years.

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and
21 kHz, so what happens with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or
higher?


Your milage may vary depending on a number of other variables. However the
effect is irrelevant to the experience of listening to music for pleasure..

Any research that shows that the 1 kHz tone is audible at
high-freqeuncy and what level of the fundamental tones are needed?

The level of high frequency energy required to stimulate nonlinearities in
order to cause spurious responses in the audible range to be heard with
typical music is too high.

With complex music the Tartinis are probably masked by lower
fundamentals, but my question related to audibility of pure tones.

The levels required are irrelevant to the experience of listening to music.


Yes probably so, but since it is impossible to prove with 100%
certainty that it is inaudible with every possible music signal
available, one can argue that the frequency limits should be set where
they are inaudible from the true source, whatever the signal is.

T

"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

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 .

Arny, since I don't have the paper, does it state how and to
what extent high frequency sounds were captured in the program
material?

Yes, it makes that very clear. The paper includes 10 spectral
plots that clearly describe the extent of the high frequency
sounds that were captured in the program material.

How about beat waves and Tartini tones? How high up in frequency
are they audible?

I don't know if its an artifact but here are two sinus tones
recorded at 20 kHz and 21 kHz:

http://hem.bredband.net/b113928/Tartini.wav

Why theorize? Why not just fire up your 24/96 sound card and listen
to the files you can easily download from
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/sample_rates/index.htm ?

Well since I don't have access to 24/96 I'm asking if such
experiments have been done.

Based on download statistics, thousands of them over the past 3
years.

I hear a 1 kHz tone in my example with 20 kHz and
21 kHz, so what happens with tones of e.g. 29 khz and 30 kHz or
higher?


Your milage may vary depending on a number of other variables.
However the effect is irrelevant to the experience of listening to
music for pleasure..

Any research that shows that the 1 kHz tone is audible at
high-freqeuncy and what level of the fundamental tones are needed?

The level of high frequency energy required to stimulate
nonlinearities in order to cause spurious responses in the audible
range to be heard with typical music is too high.

With complex music the Tartinis are probably masked by lower
fundamentals, but my question related to audibility of pure tones.

The levels required are irrelevant to the experience of listening to
music.


Yes probably so, but since it is impossible to prove with 100%
certainty that it is inaudible with every possible music signal
available, one can argue that the frequency limits should be set where
they are inaudible from the true source, whatever the signal is.

It can be so argued, and the argument can be reasonably be rejected on the
grounds that it is unreasonable. No bridge is built to handle the largest
conceivable load because were that done as a rule, very few bridges would
ever get built. Bridges are built to handle the loads that are reasonable to
carry across bridges based on practical experience.

The good news for you is that just about every computer audio interface
except for bottom-feeder specials now has some kind of support for 24/96.
This is like have a bridge can carry the largest conceivable load on tap,
for instant use when you have the disk space and processing time to spare or
waste.