Comment by hackinthebochs
14 years ago
One thing I don't see addressed is the experience of feeling frequencies that can't directly be heard. There was a study done with a particular piece of classical music, with and without a particular inaudible component to it. The presence of the inaudible component drastically changed the listeners perception of the music. They described it as more dark or creepy (perhaps not the actual words used, but it matches the sentiment). The point is that there may be value in reproducing frequencies that we can't "hear", as inaudible notes can alter the experience of the music.
*not the study I was referring to but its along the same lines: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=5291...
The author completely ignores infrasonics and writes under the incorrect assumption that our only perception of wave pressure comes from our eardrums.
I've never been able to enjoy listening to my favorite classical music on headphones or even smaller speakers, and it's largely because of the effect you describe.
At this point I'm resigned to preserving my treasured (and cumbersome) vinyl collections. Maybe if Apple comes up with some snazzy marketing term (e.g. "Retina") for 24/192 or even 24/92, and starts distributing it on iTunes, things might start to change.
You don't need a higher sample rate to capture or play back infrasonic pressure waves, but most recordings are mastered to remove DC offset and rumble <20Hz, as reproducing those components requires specialized equipment, such as a rotary subwoofer.
Wouldn't the higher bit rate help though? I've long suspected my preference is largely due to the difference in mastering techniques more than any technical limitations.
Mmm loves me some inappropriate downvotes.
Probably because you couldn't come up with the actual study you mention.