How Science Got Sound Wrong


I don't believe I've posted this before or if it has been posted before but I found it quite interesting despite its technical aspect. I didn't post this for a digital vs analog discussion. We've beat that horse to death several times. I play 90% vinyl. But I still can enjoy my CD's.  

https://www.fairobserver.com/more/science/neil-young-vinyl-lp-records-digital-audio-science-news-wil...
128x128artemus_5

Showing 1 response by nonoise

All of these talks about hearing and measurements reminded me of an older article I had bookmarked. It may be of value:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/jan/31/human-hearing-is-highly-nonlinear

Also of note, in trying to find other articles I came across this little known fact: a mechanism in the middle ear creates a force 40 times that of the original signal in order to transmit that sound the rest of the way. There's a mechanism that thwarts to some degree, intense sounds, to prevent ear damage.

Considering that, and other thoughts and mentions that we all hear differently, each of us has a unique way of hearing. Not superhuman hearing, but better and/or worse hearing, just like eyesight, taste, etc. 

So it may be just that variable that gives rise to the notion that some of us are hearing things that we shouldn't, but do in fact, hear. Maybe it took better technology of music reproduction to ferret out those who can hear those differences at what used to be a threshold that no one should hear. Maybe it was just a matter of time.

I've met people who can't see the difference in some TV monitors that purport better resolution and some who can easily spot it, even from a distance, and it wasn't until the advent of those new monitors and the gear that precedes them that those differences were made apparent. 

Just some food for thought, and not a pie fight.

All the best,
Nonoise