Thought of the Day, Part 2

[Dingman]

So, after all that discussion about speaker response and accuracy, I've found that I have a couple of newb questions. []

I've found that the biological imput equipment varies greatly. I seem to have been blessed with a fairly robust bio system and so myself and friends have noticed a distinct variety of hearing abilities. None of us explored it in any detail, but now I'm thinking~

Where does hearing ability come into play here in regards to the performance of the speaker system? [6]

I'm 50 years old and althought I haven't read up on it, I'm reasonably sure that a person's hearing diminishes in relation to age. I remember in my electronics lab many years ago, that we performed a non-scientific test of who could hear how high of a frequency. As I recall, many of us (young people) couldn't hear above 15k or so. And I've had many friends with problems hearing high frequencies.

I have no anecdotal evidence for low frequencies.

Q: For anyone with any possibly of compromised hearing, shouldn't a comprehensive hearing test proceed any high dollar purchase? Or rather, maybe more to the point, is the average person's hearing up to the task of qualifying the accuracy of reference speakers and systems?

Q2: At what point is the average person's hearing diminished to below the point of reference listening?

I know that due to the lack of non-objectivity, these are difficult questions. But surely if hearing tests show that a person can't hear above 10-11-12K (whatever), or below 250 (whatever), that person would be best served by not chasing those frequencies. [8]

I also understand that not hearing 15hz doesn't mean you can't feel 15hz.

[StephenM]

Or rather, maybe more to the point, is the average person's hearing up to the task of qualifying the accuracy of reference speakers and systems?

I would expect so. You can still discern if an instrument played through the speaker sounds like an instrument you've heard in person. You don't need your hearing to extend beyond 10kHz to recognize that a speaker exhibits high distortion, compressed dynamics, and poor frequency response (at least within your ability to hear).

Also not to write off the importance of the top octave, but the reality is that there is precious little energy in this spectrum as compared with the midrange and bass with most program material, and even in your 20s and 30s, your hearing in that spectrum is not exactly the finest.

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm#longerwires

An article was published in Audio, July 1994 titled "Speaker cables: Measurements Vs Psycho-acoustic data" by Edgar Villchur. The psycho-acoustic data shows that for pure tones at 16kHz the smallest average detectable difference in level is 3.05 dB. He also indicates: "It can be predicted that at a given level the just noticeable difference will be increased by a significantly greater amount by the masking effect of musical sound below 10 kHz." (See note 1). The findings were based on individuals 20 to 24 years old that had normal hearing to 20 kHz (See note 2). This is what might be called the best of conditions for hearing differences.

Q2: At what point is the average person's hearing diminished to below the point of reference listening?

http://www.roger-russell.com/hearing/hearing.htm

Depressing, isn't it?

Also re: the poll, no plans to get my hearing tested any time soon. I'm in my prime [] I can still hear the 15kHz tone at the end of Sgt. Pepper though.

[Chris A]

Q2: At what point is the average person's hearing diminished to below the point of reference listening?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presbycusis

http://www.sfu.ca/sonic-studio/handbook/Presbycusis.html

[russ69]

We all don't hear the same frequency range but that doesn't mean that we cannot tell a good system from a bad one. We hear what we hear and we can tell when a music system doesn't sound like the real thing even if we are not hearing it all. Having perfect hearing does not make you the most qualified audiophile. Experience and discernment make you a good audiophile.

The practical side of the problem is that, hearing losses are in the higher frequency range and most of the music is not in that range. Additionally, a system that produces a decent performance in the middle hearing range usually produces a decent performance near the extremes, and at any rate if a system sucks in the band you can hear the rest of the band is insignificant.

[JJkizak]

For me: 19HZ to 10KHZ at 98db SPL.

JJK

[Chris A]

I also understand that not hearing 15hz doesn't mean you can't feel 15hz.

If it's loud enough, you can hear it. Of course, if you're boosting the hf to make up for age-related hearing loss, your pets will probably be running for cover long before you reach the "equalization point"...[&]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mosquito

[^o)]

[Groomlakearea51]

Q3: Does the consumption of beer increase the audible frequency response capability in certain individuals?

[Dingman]

For me: 19HZ to 10KHZ at 98db SPL.

JJK

Very Good, you are the winner as the only person who's tested. [Y]

I sure am tempted and if I'm not mistaken, I might be able to get the company I work for to cover it. Maybe.

But only up to 10K? Pardon me for asking, but isn't that a bit low? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something. [8-|]

It occurs to me that a simple program on the PC, a freq generator, output to some headphones would be a valid test. [:#]

[Dingman]

Q3: Does the consumption of beer increase the audible frequency response capability in certain individuals?

I have a fair bit of empirical evidence that indicates that the response is inversely proportionate to the amount consumed, until the sweet spot is achieved and then it's all downhill from there. [8o|]

[Dingman]

Cask05, that is hilarious in a way... the Mosquito... I kind of like that idea and wonder if I could apply that technique to some of the teens in this area...

LOL, thanks for sharing that. []

[garyrc]

I'm 50 years old and althought I haven't read up on it, I'm reasonably sure that a person's hearing diminishes in relation to age. I remember in my electronics lab many years ago, that we performed a non-scientific test of who could hear how high of a frequency. As I recall, many of us (young people) couldn't hear above 15k or so. And I've had many friends with problems hearing high frequencies.

Conventional hearing tests measure frequency response at very low Sound Pressure Level (SPL). If you can detect 500 Hz at a given SPL, you may need 10K turned up to a much higher level to detect it. High frequency hearing does roll off with age,
especially for men, and does so dramatically when plotted in terms of loss at very low SPLs. The charts in a former post show typical hearing loss across frequencies at various ages, but it should be pointed out that even young people with good hearing experience much more roll off (in the highs and the lows) at low SPLs than at louder SPLs, as shown in the Fletcher-Munson curves, and those of later researchers..

You listen to most music at much higher SPLs than those used in hearing tests. Those with a little age related hearing loss may experience less high frequency hearing loss when listening at a higher SPL than used in hearing tests, due to mechanical factors or due to increased cortical arousal at higher SPLs. For instance, the softest musical passage (or the softest speech) may be perceived as having less high frequency content by older people than by the young, but that might be less true of louder passages. A 50 year old (to use Dingman's example) may hear a cymbal crash about the same -- with as much shimmer and brightness -- as he would have heard it as a teenager.

I once searched through a book titled Fifty Seminal Papers on Human Hearing and failed to find any research concerning wide bandwidth frequency response at the SPLs found in most music ...not seminal enough to get attention, apparently. There must be something out there -- some graduate student who is also a musician must have looked into this.

[JJkizak]

I used a very accurate frequency test CD which of course passed through all of the equipment. There was a very strong peak at 9KHZ. The 19HZ was very dramatic as it rattled my brain. I don't know how the final response would be with those very cheasy headphones the doctors use for hearing tests.

The Rat Shack meter confirmed my result, and tested all the way to 21KHZ

JJK

[StephenM]

You listen to most music at much higher SPLs than those used in hearing tests. Those with a little age related hearing loss may experience less high frequency hearing loss when listening at a higher SPL than used in hearing tests, due to mechanical factors or due to increased cortical arousal at higher SPLs. For instance, the softest musical passage (or the softest speech) may be perceived as having less high frequency content by older people than by the young, but that might be less true of louder passages.

I believe the trouble you run into with this theory is otherwise known as the masking effect. If someone with hearing loss sat a foot away from a cymbal crash with no other noise, it is possible they could detect some of the ringing, albeit at extremely low levels. In the context of a band, that ringing is typically going to be masked by other instruments playing which are percieved at a much higher level (guitar, bass, etc).

A 50 year old (to use Dingman's example) may hear a cymbal crash about the same -- with as much shimmer and brightness -- as he would have heard it as a teenager.

More likely is that they perceive it to be the same if they know what the cymbal crash is supposed to sound like. Wouldn't shock me given the way our brains operate. One example, in reverse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_fundamental

[garyrc]

You listen to most music at much higher SPLs than those used in hearing tests. Those with a little age related hearing loss may experience less high frequency hearing loss when listening at a higher SPL than used in hearing tests, due to mechanical factors or due to increased cortical arousal at higher SPLs. For instance, the softest musical passage (or the softest speech) may be perceived as having less high frequency content by older people than by the young, but that might be less true of louder passages.

I believe the trouble you run into with this theory is otherwise known as the masking effect. If someone with hearing loss sat a foot away from a cymbal crash with no other noise, it is possible they could detect some of the ringing, albeit at extremely low levels. In the context of a band, that ringing is typically going to be masked by other instruments playing which are percieved at a much higher level (guitar, bass, etc).

A 50 year old (to use Dingman's example) may hear a cymbal crash about the same -- with as much shimmer and brightness -- as he would have heard it as a teenager.

More likely is that they perceive it to be the same if they know what the cymbal crash is supposed to sound like. Wouldn't shock me given the way our brains operate. One example, in reverse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_fundamental

• I agree that the brain could fill in detail, given prior knowledge of what cymbal crashes sound like..... but even though our brains know that, a cymbal crash on an (old style) optical soundtrack or from another room through the wall, loses much shimmer, and the brain doesn't fill in, not much anyway, since it sounds very dull.
• In my experience cymbal crashes are hard to mask.

[StephenM]

In my experience cymbal crashes are hard to mask.

AFAIK, the "crash" of a crash cymbal itself can be fairly high in amplitude and have fundamentals much lower than the top octave (extending down into the lower midrange even), and that would be difficult to mask. However, the ringing which reaches (and in fact exceeds) the top octave, albeit at lower levels, is easily enough masked by a wailing electric guitar.

[garyrc]

In my experience cymbal crashes are hard to mask.

AFAIK, the "crash" of a crash cymbal itself can be fairly high in amplitude and have fundamentals much lower than the top octave (extending down into the lower midrange even), and that would be difficult to mask. However, the ringing which reaches (and in fact exceeds) the top octave, albeit at lower levels, is easily enough masked by a wailing electric guitar.

I see how a wailing electric guitar could mask a lot, including cymbals. My primary experience with cymbals is in orchestral music and acoustical jazz, and in those kinds of music cymbals penetrate pretty well.

Back to my earlier point, I guess I meant that even though someone might have some hearing loss at 5 K or so, with more roll off above when measured at threshold, they might hear a lot more in that range at the higher SPLs in music, especially with something as loud as a cymbal crash.

This thread started with a question about whether a person with age related hearing loss at 50 and above had good enough hearing to judge differences between sound systems of different quality. I'll bet that most older people could easily tell the difference (detect a difference in shimmer) between a big cymbal crash as presented on an old optical movie sound track (which rolled off steeply starting at about 5 K), compared to the same crash presented in some medium with good high frequency response (like a magnetic or digital movie track). Good sound systems aren't as different from one another as the media in that last example, but I bet a lot of old folk could hear the difference between various general types of tweeters (compression/horn, dome, cone, ribbon, etc.). If I had earplugs in, I'll bet I could hear the difference, and I'm imagining that the differential attenuation of earplugs is like moderate hearing loss. True, a person with some hearing loss probably wouldn't hear the 20-30 dB down shimmer at 15 K, but at typically high SPLs they might hear enough at 5 - 10K. to clearly discern between good highs and those that were lacking. I had an old audio recording teacher (beyond retirement) who had ears like a dog. Some of the less sensitive students tried to fool him by turning down the treble, and he always detected it.

Does anyone know of research in this area?