|
|
Post by sq225917 on Dec 8, 2019 19:15:17 GMT
Oli you're wrong. The cones and rods in your eyes are sensitive only to specific wavelengths, they simply arent excited by those above and beyond the visible spectrum. The absolute upper limit of your cones and rods is 300nm and your lens usually blocks to quite a bit below this. If you have Aphakia, you can see a very small bit of what is usually termed uv as this condition allows low end uv to pass through.
Any colour we see is caused by the summation of all the visible frequencies hitting the eye, so yes we see a blend of everything made from primary colours, but we dont have infra red or ultra violet sensitive cells in the eye. That is utter nonsense.
If a wavelength is invisible it is by very definition invisible and doesnt cause an optical ' warble' like sound waves above the audible limit can. The presence of UV doesnt make red appear a different shade of red.
The reason it happens with sound is because the ear is a pressure difference sensing device, arranged in blocks of frequency internally. The presence of an ultrasonic carrier affects the pressure hitting the ear because it excites all the air molecules, uv doesnt push red light out of the way simply by being there, so doesnt affect our perception of colour.
If you were a bird it would be different as they have some uv sensitive cells, we simply do not.
At least that's what I learnt in my microbiology degree.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 8, 2019 19:16:32 GMT
So a maximum sampling frequency of 50Khz would be the best they could exploit. If there's anything to exploit. I have no idea lol |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 8, 2019 19:19:16 GMT
Oli you're wrong. The cones and rods in your eyes are sensitive only to specific wavelengths, they simply arent excited by those above and beyond the visible spectrum. Any colour we see is caused by the summation of all the visible frequencies hitting the eye, so yes we see a blend of everything made from primary colours, but we dont have infra red or ultra violet sensitive cells in the eye. That is utter nonsense. Yes, they are sensitive to specific wavelengths but that's my point! Maybe a point badly made, but there are wavelengths we can't see, but just because we can't see them doesn't mean they don't influence something, somewhere. All I am getting at is that I just don't accept that because something is out of our audible range, that it has no significance. |
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Dec 8, 2019 19:31:34 GMT
You're totally right about the possible effects of ultra Sonics on audible sound and totally wrong about light.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Dec 8, 2019 20:08:55 GMT
Do your tweeters have metal domes? If so, you're looking at a 10db or so resonance at 25 - 30khz. Modern ring radiators do go out flat-ish to 40khz I gather. Noises coming through from the source and still amplified by the amp may well get to the tweeters which will try to reproduce it.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 8, 2019 23:17:55 GMT
You're totally right about the possible effects of ultra Sonics on audible sound and totally wrong about light. Not taking about light, but I'm happy to be right about sound lol Anyway, what were talking about? Hahaha |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 8, 2019 23:21:21 GMT
Do your tweeters have metal domes? If so, you're looking at a 10db or so resonance at 25 - 30khz. Modern ring radiators do go out flat-ish to 40khz I gather. Noises coming through from the source and still amplified by the amp may well get to the tweeters which will try to reproduce it. Yup, metal domes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2019 23:41:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Dec 9, 2019 12:56:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 9, 2019 13:38:53 GMT
So a maximum sampling frequency of 50Khz would be the best they could exploit. If there's anything to exploit. I have no idea lol You can reproduce a frequency half that of the maximum sampling frequency. So 96Khz sampling will capture frequencies up to 48Khz, or 23Khz higher than the maximum your speakers are capable of.
Still better than mine though, they only manage 23Khz.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 13:52:25 GMT
Don't flrt with a R2R........ Go down on your knees and marry it. But guaranteed it won't ever ever suck like a Dragon.  |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 9, 2019 14:01:10 GMT
You can reproduce a frequency half that of the maximum sampling frequency. So 96Khz sampling will capture frequencies up to 48Khz, or 23Khz higher than the maximum your speakers are capable of.
Still better than mine though, they only manage 23Khz.
Right, I see. I don't know where you learned all this stuff Macca, but I am glad you did lol |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 14:04:52 GMT
But wtf does it mean....?
All due respect Macca.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 14:07:21 GMT
It means Jack Sh#t to me and 78.34% of anyone bar an audiophile.
Audiophiles please stand up....!!!
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 9, 2019 14:15:50 GMT
It means Jack Sh#t to me and 78.34% of anyone bar an audiophile. Audiophiles please stand up....!!! Did you know that 78.34% of stats are made up? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 14:17:59 GMT
And the rest is bullshit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 14:40:07 GMT
It means Jack Sh#t to me and 78.34% of anyone bar an audiophile. Audiophiles please stand up....!!! Did you know that 78.34% of stats are made up? 78.34% of people asked thought so. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 14:46:08 GMT
21.66 %
Didn't ?
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 9, 2019 15:25:26 GMT
But wtf does it mean....? All due respect Macca. limit of human hearing is 20Khz - so when digital audio was invented they wanted the digital format to have a frequency response that was at least 20Khz.
To record or replay to 20Kjz you need to sample up to 40 Khz - this is how the maths work out - You can capture frequencies up to half the sampling rate. Hence CD has 44.1 Khz sampling rate so will go up to a frequency of 22.5 Khz - at lest in theory, in practice it is a little less.
You can go up to any limit you want as long as you have the processing power, so we have 96 and 192 khz sampling rates and that means you can record and replay frequencies up to 48 Khz and 96 Khz respectively.
You can read more about it on this thing called the internet:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem
Some think that the higher the sample rate the more 'snapshots' you are taking of the analogue waveform and therefore the more 'detail' you are getting. But it doesn't work like that. The waveform is captured exactly, and in its entirety, regardless of the sampling rate, but only within the frequency response dictated by the sampling rate. Anything beyond that is lost.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 9, 2019 15:41:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Dec 9, 2019 16:23:43 GMT
It means Jack Sh#t to me and 78.34% of anyone bar an audiophile. Audiophiles please stand up....!!! You're talking bollocks again Harrison, the figure should read 99.9 including audiophiles.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 16:42:09 GMT
Aye .... sorry Ant that may be closer the mark.
Audiophile is so yesterday..... Audiofools that's where it's at.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Dec 9, 2019 18:40:07 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 18:50:56 GMT
But the on/off switch is on the back!!!
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 9, 2019 18:51:45 GMT
That hump isn't great at all. Regardless of whether you can hear it, there is a published fix on ASR somewhere. If the designer fixes the hump, this could be all anyone ever needs |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 21:04:04 GMT
There is a lot of excitement and user experience on Hoffman regarding Denafrips ladder DACS. Considering one myself. In the end conventional DACs always are a bit two dimensional. Users are reporting many positive attributes of analogue sound from these products. These DACS are discrete and don't use a chip. Before DSJR chips in I'm sure measurements do not necessarily relate to sound in this case. Audioscience Review have thrashed some decent sounding kit by all accounts. That guy who does the measuring got a hard time from Hoffmanites over a forum favourite phono stage he ripped apart. Not convinced he is so expert as he thinks he is.
|
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Dec 9, 2019 21:11:11 GMT
Where hes shown to be wrong he corrects himself, real science at work
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 9, 2019 21:11:52 GMT
There is a lot of excitement and user experience on Hoffman regarding Denafrips ladder DACS. Considering one myself. In the end conventional DACs always are a bit two dimensional. Users are reporting many positive attributes of analogue sound from these products. These DACS are discrete and don't use a chip. Before DSJR chips in I'm sure measurements do not necessarily relate to sound in this case. Audioscience Review have thrashed some decent sounding kit by all accounts. That guy who does the measuring got a hard time from Hoffmanites over a forum favourite phono stage he ripped apart. Not convinced he is so expert as he thinks he is. It does seem (looking around the Web) that R2R dacs aren't quite a linear or distortion free as the best chip DACs and seeing as distortion figures are so impactful on performance, it stands to reason that chip DACs are the way to go. However, the recent R2R DACs have a bit of software or hardware to reduce this distortion to almost the same levels. It's a varied subject for sure and one I need to do a lot of investigation about. I'd sincerely like ASR to measure the Denafrips Terminator. It's bashed the Schiit of similar design and the measurements don't lie. Very interesting subject. If you manage to hear one, please report back. I'd be interested to know what first hand listening impression it made. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2019 21:56:17 GMT
£459 from Amazon, so if it is not what you want you can send it back easily. |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Dec 10, 2019 7:26:52 GMT
To Classickrock -
See, I realised not too long ago that gear with a nice 'musical sound' usually measures abominably, the spray of distortion and often band limiting or compression giving that 'sound quality.' I can't say more, but some digging usually comes up with something to justify my current vibes. Dacs now seem to be a commodity pretty much (even the 'dac for a fiver' we used to rave about 'sounds' pretty damned good if you forget it's what you're listening to and measurably, the generic ones are borderline 16 bit, but heard blind, they're actually very ok indeed.
|
|
)