Skip to main content

Topic: Simple Hearing Test (Read 66773 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #50
I'd feel better if one of the R&D experts can vouch for my claim, though I've never heard of a soundcard that plays 44.1 natively but resamples 48.  Then I guess someone might inquire about the resampler Benski used.

For the record, just over 17kHz and I'm 36.  My soundcard sucks (sblive 5.1) as do my speakers but I would be surprised if they couldn't reproduce frequencies above what I can hear.  Maybe one of my neighbors will let me borrow one of their kids.

FWIW, I can hear aliasing in the 44.1kHz version but not in the 48kHz version so long as I'm not using an external resampler like what is in foobar2000.
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 05:32:12 AM by greynol
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.

  • j7n
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #51
16.5k. Couldn't resist.

My job for 2 yeas was to play back loud music over a smiley face EQ'd system. I wonder if this has anything to do with the poor result.

I've never heard of a soundcard that plays 44.1 natively but resamples 48.

Well, the soundcard could have stuck in 44.1 kHz mode, or doesn't support auto switching at all.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #52
I guess it would be wrong to assume that improper playback would only result in people thinking they can hear over a greater range of frequencies and never result in a reduced range of frequencies?
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.

  • m00
  • [*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #53
17Khz on open back headphones in an fairly noisy office..
Oh, and 39 years old..

  • Alex B
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #54
Benski,

Out of curiosity, how did you resample the file? It appears to have a very slight lowpass filtering applied (at about 21.8 kHz).

When you posted your version I already had created a 48 kHz version with Audition and its sweep starts about 500 ms earlier because the file is not lowpassed.

)

  • Alex B
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #55
I'd feel better if one of the R&D experts can vouch for my claim, though I've never heard of a soundcard that plays 44.1 natively but resamples 48.

The original SB 16 and SB 32 AWE ISA sound cards supported only up to 44.1 kHz sample rates. I have not used my SB 32 AWE for ages, but I suppose a recent Windows version would resample 48 kHz to 44.1 kHz. I don't know if the Windows versions from early 90's would be able to play 48 kHz at all with these sound cards.

At some stage Creative's later PCI models changed to support 48 kHz instead of 44.1 kHz. I think this was a part of Microsoft's multimedia PC specifications.

Edit: As far as I know, only the "creation mode" in Creative's X-fi series supports 44.1 kHz again natively.
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 09:20:46 AM by Alex B

  • GeSomeone
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #56
.. Creative's later PCI models changed to support 48 kHz instead of 44.1 kHz. I think this was a part of Microsoft's multimedia PC specifications.

I think it had to do with Intel's AC'97 specification.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.

  • Alex B
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #57
Probably you are correct.

Microsoft's Multimedia PC specifications Level 1, 2 and 3 from the 90's specify sample rates only up to 44.1 kHz. I didn't find any newer "levels". (Isn't Google wonderful?)

  • benski
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #58
Benski,

Out of curiosity, how did you resample the file? It appears to have a very slight lowpass filtering applied (at about 21.8 kHz).

When you posted your version I already had created a 48 kHz version with Audition and its sweep starts about 500 ms earlier because the file is not lowpassed.


Foobar2000 PPHS ultra mode. 

On my file I can hear* a slow fade-in when the tone starts.  Thought this might have been because I couldn't hear higher, but looking at the waveform indicates that this might be an effect of the low-pass filtering

* really, at this frequency, I feel it.  I don't recognize it as a musical tone until around 19.5khz

  • uart
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #59
How do you get a 17kHz sine wave from a 48kHz sample?  ...You can't!  You can get a waveform with an average frequency of 17kHz.  And, that's good enough for regular audio reproduction...  I'm not trying to start-up another sample-rate debate. 

A 17kHz sine wave has alternating positive and negative peaks every 29.4 uS (a period of 58.8 uS).  At 48kHz, you get one sample every 20.8 uS.  Those original peaks are lost as soon as you sample.  There is just no way that the digital-to-analog converter can reproduce the original waveform!  The sample-points don't "line up" with where the positive/negative peaks need to be. 

I know Nyquist[/u] says you can theoretically reconstruct the original 17kHz sine wave (given enough samples over a long-enough time).  But, DACs and soundcards don't do that kind of mathematical analysis or processing...  They just spit-out a series of data-points (analog voltages), one at a time, with low pass filtering to smooth-out the waveform.


Doug that is such a common misconception, I see it everywhere (and especially on pro-vinyl forums) but it's just not true. You are seriously underestimating how good is the analog re-construction of modern soundcard DAC's.

Let me simply post an oscilloscope photograph of the actual  output (line-out) voltage coming from the onboard sound (realtek AC97) of my computer. This sample was taken while playing the wave-file from this very listening test. I took the shot midway between the 21kHz and 20kHz voice over, as you can see the wave is about 20.5 kHz. Looks like a pretty good sine wave yes.

We have to try and dispel this myth.

see image here :
http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=soundcardoutbl9.gif
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 10:27:13 AM by uart

Simple Hearing Test
Reply #60
though I've never heard of a soundcard that plays 44.1 natively but resamples 48.

I use the ESI Juli@ soundcard in my HTPC. It always plays with the correct sample rate and does not resample.
The M-Audio Delta Audiophile 192 and the RME Digi 96/8 Pad are also soundcards that do not resample. I've tested all three - the RME Digi 96/8 Pad I use in my main PC.
The ESI Juli@ I can recommend most because card+drivers are very good and stable and allow a use in all areas (WDM DirectX ASIO...).

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #61
Sure, though I never suggested there weren't cards that could do both natively.

If it's any consolation, I own a Delta 1010.
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 12:41:09 PM by greynol
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.

  • JRace
  • [*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #62
Ummm...you all realize that this test is horrible inacurate?
Can your speakers properly output 20kHz and are they calbrated (referenced to 1Khz @ 0dB HL)?
--This is considered the Audiological standard.
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 01:02:01 PM by JRace

  • zipr
  • [*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #63
Tried this again with headphones at work.  Using Benski's file, I hear a sound as the speaker is finishing up saying 22, it kind of sounds like it's winding up through when the speaker says 21. Then I don't hear any tone again until 18, where it's then constant.

Simple Hearing Test
Reply #64
Sure, though I never suggested there weren't cards that could do both natively.

If it's any consolation, I own a Delta 1010.

Now I got it. Seems I did not pay attention enough when reding your post the first time...
English is not my native language.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #65
Anyway, I really have to back away from my claim that Benski's file should work for everyone.  Besides the hardware, there are other factors to consider such as drivers, software and OS considerations.  I have no expertise on this subject.
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 01:24:55 PM by greynol
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.

  • [JAZ]
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #66
Then I don't hear any tone again until 18, where it's then constant.


Then, that implies that you really can only hear up until 18Khz, and the other sounds are not the tone, but bad reproduction of the sample.

  • skelly831
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #67
I can start to hear a tone right before the person says 18k.
I'm using a SB X-Fi XtremeGamer set in "audio creation mode" and bit-matched playback, I don't know if this is correctly playing back the file.
we was young an' full of beans

  • Martel
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #68

though I've never heard of a soundcard that plays 44.1 natively but resamples 48.

I use the ESI Juli@ soundcard in my HTPC. It always plays with the correct sample rate and does not resample.
The M-Audio Delta Audiophile 192 and the RME Digi 96/8 Pad are also soundcards that do not resample. I've tested all three - the RME Digi 96/8 Pad I use in my main PC.
The ESI Juli@ I can recommend most because card+drivers are very good and stable and allow a use in all areas (WDM DirectX ASIO...).

Have you thought about what actually happens when two applications each simultaneously play sounds with different sample rates? The driver/OS/card then HAS TO resample for obvious reasons.
IE4 Rockbox Clip+ AAC@192; HD 668B/HD 518 Xonar DX FB2k FLAC;

  • Nuthen
  • [*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #69
I was able to hear up to 17k, and I am 17.  But I was using an integrated sound card (I am using M-Audio Sudiophile AV 40 speakers), so I don't know if that would affect it
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 04:14:58 PM by Nuthen

  • smok3
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Moderator
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #70
no for 22, yes for 21 to 18, then no for 17, then again yes. hmmm.
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung

  • [JAZ]
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #71
no for 22, yes for 21 to 18, then no for 17, then again yes. hmmm.


If that happened with the sample on the webpage, try with the one benski posted in this link http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....65398&st=0#

But from your description, it probably is 17Khz for you too.
Of course, it also means that your equipment can't properly reproduce 44Khz content.

  • TuNk77
  • [*][*][*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #72
I can barely hear 15k I'm 30 years old
Edit; with my AKG 240 and SB x-fi i can hear ~17K
  • Last Edit: 21 August, 2008, 09:25:02 PM by TuNk77

Simple Hearing Test
Reply #73
Have you thought about what actually happens when two applications each simultaneously play sounds with different sample rates? The driver/OS/card then HAS TO resample for obvious reasons.

That's true, in this case it has to (multiple sounds with different samplerates played through the same channels).

  • lesswire
  • [*]
Simple Hearing Test
Reply #74
Between 16 and 17 Khz. I'm almost 28. I guess this is the result of too much loud metal.



I guess this test may be biased depending on the sound card, earphones etc...I had a hearing test with a doctor about 3 years ago and he told me my hearing was very healthy...well maybe it's no longer.

EDIT: When opening the file with winamp I was able to hear starting from 18Khz, it's a pretty annoying sound.
  • Last Edit: 26 August, 2008, 05:46:12 PM by lesswire