In Reply to: RE: Follow these links posted by Jack D II on December 23, 2014 at 10:03:00:
I don't think we have the answers in yet, and I'm open to all options.
First, I think Rupert Neve's talk, posted ages ago in prop head or t-squared, goes into some digital hash they heard on a system and had a hard time sussing out. The culprit was something in the DAC algorithm that caused a spike somewhere above 40kHz. I'm sure neither Rupert nor I can hear 40k, and I believe him when he says that something about that spike made itself heard to his fairly elderly ears. (No measured anomalies showed up below that spike.) Rupert makes the proposition that we *may* have to make our digital systems clean up to the 60kHz region in order to make digital better. He may be right.
Second, I wonder how it is that we adjust so easily to extremely reduced frequency response. My 1931 recording of Faust with Vezzani, Journet, and Merthon has nothing, I'd guess, above 5kHz, and nothing below 300Hz, but after a few minutes my ears and brain adjust, and the music comes through wonderfully.
I find it curious that we might need lots more ultrasonic extension to get it all, *and* we can enjoy music with hugely restricted response at both ends. Contradictions can be good if they keep us thinking.
WW
"Put on your high heeled sneakers. Baby, we''re goin'' out tonight.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- ultrasonics - Bill Way 12/23/1411:13:07 12/23/14 (0)