 
|
Computer Audio Asylum: RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate by Tony Lauck Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Computer Audio Asylum: RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate by Tony Lauck Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
For Sale Ads |
65.19.76.104
In Reply to: RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate posted by Werner on July 30, 2009 at 09:53:13:
If I were a betting man, I would bet that many if not most of the subjects would pass the test at a slightly higher frequency, given that they all passed the 7 KHz test. Not sure how far a bet I would place.
Speaking as an engineer, I would agree that the test should be repeated at 8 kHz. Or perhaps 8001 Hz. :-)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 19:26:14 07/26/09 ( 72)
- Have any of you read the Audio Critic Double/Blind study.... - deskducker 00:26:17 07/31/09 ( 36)
- Better duck under that desk; - Kristian 08:54:55 07/31/09 ( 35)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - deskducker 10:32:13 07/31/09 ( 34)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Kristian 10:52:43 07/31/09 ( 33)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 22:46:23 07/31/09 ( 31)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 04:35:48 08/1/09 ( 30)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 09:11:52 08/1/09 ( 29)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 10:13:02 08/1/09 ( 28)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 20:01:03 08/1/09 ( 27)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 06:00:31 08/2/09 ( 26)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 06:48:18 08/2/09 ( 25)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 07:16:17 08/2/09 ( 24)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:22:52 08/2/09 ( 23)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 01:05:50 08/3/09 ( 22)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 04:06:20 08/3/09 ( 21)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 04:40:30 08/3/09 ( 20)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:08:53 08/3/09 ( 19)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 07:56:07 08/3/09 ( 18)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 12:09:11 08/3/09 ( 17)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 14:42:51 08/3/09 ( 16)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:27:33 08/3/09 ( 15)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 19:46:06 08/3/09 ( 14)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:24:51 08/4/09 ( 0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 02:55:41 08/4/09 ( 12)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Tony Lauck 17:29:58 08/5/09 ( 0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 05:05:49 08/4/09 ( 7)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 19:12:49 08/5/09 ( 4)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 19:46:58 08/5/09 ( 3)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 20:00:35 08/5/09 ( 2)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 03:56:22 08/6/09 ( 1)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - riboge 07:50:41 08/6/09 ( 0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Tony Lauck 17:40:32 08/5/09 ( 1)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 19:17:37 08/5/09 ( 0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 04:13:36 08/4/09 ( 2)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 07:59:20 08/5/09 ( 1)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 23:19:23 08/5/09 ( 0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Ryelands 06:26:29 08/10/09 ( 0)
- RE: Better duck under that desk; - Werner 06:50:25 08/10/09 ( 0)
RE: Better duck under that desk; - Phelonious Ponk 18:15:04 07/31/09 ( 0)
RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 07:44:51 07/29/09 ( 14)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 09:11:05 07/29/09 ( 12)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 10:41:27 07/29/09 ( 11)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 13:04:49 07/29/09 ( 10)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 14:52:26 07/29/09 ( 9)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 22:40:02 07/29/09 ( 8)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 02:29:20 07/30/09 ( 7)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 04:09:24 07/30/09 ( 6)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 08:57:45 07/30/09 ( 3)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Werner 09:53:13 07/30/09 ( 1)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 07/30/09 13:47:57 07/30/09 ( 0)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 09:16:45 07/30/09 ( 0)
- I second the agreement... - Phelonious Ponk 07:48:46 07/30/09 ( 0)
- Completely agree with you. nt - drrd 07:03:18 07/30/09 ( 0)
RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 09:04:11 07/29/09 ( 0)
Temporal resolution and RBCD - cics 13:22:50 07/28/09 ( 1)
- RE: Temporal resolution and RBCD - Ryelands 04:37:17 07/29/09 ( 0)
RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 09:51:02 07/28/09 ( 6)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 11:09:45 07/28/09 ( 3)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 11:06:06 07/29/09 ( 0)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - secretsquirrel 03:57:11 12/4/09 ( 0)
- Get out while you still have time! - Ryelands 06:50:55 12/4/09 ( 0)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 06:42:30 07/29/09 ( 0)
RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 21:14:20 07/28/09 ( 0)
RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 10:34:26 07/28/09 ( 1)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Phelonious Ponk 21:20:55 07/28/09 ( 0)
RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Ryelands 03:01:40 07/28/09 ( 0)
This is silly - audiozorro 09:05:51 07/27/09 ( 0)
RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - mls-stl 20:11:35 07/26/09 ( 8)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - drrd 03:27:22 07/27/09 ( 7)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - AstroD 00:00:32 07/28/09 ( 5)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - joeljoel1947 09:01:16 07/29/09 ( 0)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - Tony Lauck 07:51:15 07/28/09 ( 3)
- another interesting test - Werner 22:45:55 07/29/09 ( 1)
- RE: another interesting test - Tony Lauck 07:16:45 07/30/09 ( 0)
- RE: 44.1 kHz shown scientifically to be inadequate - AstroD 16:33:02 07/28/09 ( 0)
"It's not really that obvious" - mls-stl 10:53:45 07/27/09 ( 0)
[Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
