Jump to content

esldude

Members
  • Content Count

    11172
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About esldude

  • Rank
    Masters Level Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It is only a -5 db dip there. So not great, but plenty of mikes do worse.
  2. So how can ribbons have better transient response if they are so truncated in frequency response? OTOH, not all are. Like this Samar MF65 ribbon.
  3. No the condenser will have the better transient response. Ribbons while light have to move more.
  4. Ever think that maybe ribbons with a slower transient response are providing a beneficial limiting upon the rate of change in a digitally sampled system?
  5. So a few of you are now touting wide bandwidth microphones and the needed system FR to capture them. Many of the really nice recordings these days use very high quality ribbon microphones. Ribbons are definitely not wide bandwidth, but they seem to capture something special in the sound. Maybe it is the whole velocity vs pressure thing.
  6. I love my one and only Earthworks microphone. If I weren't so cheap or they weren't so expensive I'd have more. And in fact was recently trying to re-orient on microphones. Sell some, buy some better, thin the herd (or is that heard) and up the quality.
  7. Those microphones you are describing approximate the human hearing curve at those frequencies. Yes, I know you would want them flat beyond the human limit ideally.
  8. What I posted was your typical hard struck cymbals showing they didn't stress the rise time of redbook. There are some things which could stress it. Miska shows some in his post. But those would look to be from something at more than 60 khz. Guys, there is some frequency beyond which it simply cannot matter to us humans. Maybe it is a little more than 20 khz for some rare situations maybe it isn't. Even people with good high frequency hearing have a steep, steep rise in the threshold once you pass 15 khz. The idea 44 or 48 khz sampling drastically effects playback quality is quite ridiculous I think. If you do everything else right in the chain, 44 khz recordings vs higher rates might be just barely audible as different. It isn't like 44 khz will sound significantly degraded and 96 khz or higher will sound wonderful. Of all the things involved in getting a good recording the sample rate ranks way down near the bottom of such a list, and may not matter at all.
  9. The examples of ultrasonic effects are either via bone conduction or focused ultrasonics. Neither are comparable to just listening to wide band music via air conduction. So ultrasonics in recordings in my opinion matter somewhere from very, very little to effectively not at all. If you think they matter, then record to 88 or 96 khz. You are covered. This also happens to Mark Waldrep's opinion which he apparently now doubts. Thinking maybe going beyond 48 khz is meaningless or close to it.
  10. That is a variation that has been investigated in a few forms since at least the 1980's. Most use bone conduction of ultrasound. That can resonate the inner ear stimulating the nerves there. The brain apparently de-tunes at frequencies that are related to the resonance which can include the lower frequencies at which tinnitus is perceived. In essence your damaged inner ear is sending signals to your brain's hearing centers that aren't there. By resonating the nerve and structure of the inner ear it sends signals that cause the brain to attenutuate the perception of it. Rather like how your low level hearing sensitivity is raised after being exposed to loud sounds. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3719163 Something more recent. https://www.pnas.org/content/109/21/E1344
  11. Wasn't this only at very high sound levels where the ultrasound was making the air non linear?
  12. I think TP is best used for the little orifices in the rear. For your bass. You know speaker ports. Oh and btw, TP is the best oil filter for your car. Google it.
  13. If you've ever had a good stereo in your car, one with good bass response to 50 hz or a bit lower (good response, not under-dampened booming thud) you might have experienced the following. Pull into your driveway, listening to music for a bit with car idling. Shut off the car, but leave music playing. And it seems like someone turned up the bass maybe 2 db, and cleaned (tightened) it up some. I could talk about the battery vs the alternator supplied juice. What happened was the fairly high level though subjectively just noticed low frequency rumble of the engine running was noise in way of the bass and its details. It was partly obscured. Turning the engine off cleared it up like a fog lifting.
  14. Yes, that isn't really news. It is just ignored quite often. Among other things as we age and our hearing is stressed or damaged, the masking curves change. The masking filters become less sharp. So some material that might be masked if young, can be unmasked when older. In some senses that is sort of like hearing what you couldn't hear before, but in general except rather odd circumstances your hearing acuity is really worse. An obvious subjective experience is how well you can hear and carry on a conversation at say a sporting event with a crowd and its incessant noise or say conversation at a crowded party. Something you could do when young that with deteriorating masking the same situation becomes a constant noise you can't pierce through and separate out. At first blush this explanation might seem backwards. With normal hearing our ears parse things out into maybe 30 shifting bands. With a widened filter with age multiple bands may be activated when only one or fewer would be with better hearing. In situations of simpler stimulus this might result in one band being activated by an out of band signal that when younger would have been ignored resulting in a subjective increase in loudness or prominence of the sound. MP3 indeed would fit as such a stimulus. Here is another odd little thing I've run across. Our perception changes in regard to which temporal lobe of the brain is most involved with age. This article also examines "babble noise levels" vs age. The crowd situation I mentioned above. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4348517/
  15. Got around to comparing your x and y files in some software. Blue is x and white is y. A more than 10 db difference in much of the upper octave. I wonder if on the louder more transient portions this is why it sounds different. It does go down with lesser differences into the top 2 khz I can hear. So often audible differences turn out to be FR variation. Sample rate likely has nothing to do with sound differences in these two files.
×
×
  • Create New...