Re: High-frequency hearing in humans (Joachim Thiemann )


Subject: Re: High-frequency hearing in humans
From:    Joachim Thiemann  <joachim.thiemann@xxxxxxxx>
Date:    Fri, 4 Feb 2011 09:36:39 -0500
List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 23:08, Kevin Austin <kevin.austin@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > A colleague of mine has been working on clicks in an electroacoustics aural perception course. He discovered that a 48kHz sampling rate was "too crude", and that working at 96kHz (or higher), the differences between clicks over 8kHz were noticeable. This is not quite what sampling theory seems to say. At 44.1kHz, a single sample click represents 22kHz, and a two sample click represents 11kHz. How does one represent a 16kHz click with a 44.1kHz sampling rate? I think one has to be careful about the actual D/A hardware in these cases. Oversampled sigma/delta? R-2R? What are the postfilter characteristics? I think with these type of stimuli, differences might be audible: even if the same soundcard is used at different rates, the filter should change. The differences in filter characteristics might extend to lower frequencies, where they might be picked up by individuals with good hearing. Joe. -- Joachim Thiemann :: http://www.tsp.ece.mcgill.ca/~jthiem


This message came from the mail archive
/home/empire6/dpwe/public_html/postings/2011/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University