2. analog
  3. 193843-192353

Source of Fremer's "1 arc second" claim?

In the latest TAS April 2025, page 34, Fremer reviews some Technics TT, and repeats his claim that "listeners in blind tests could hear arc second speed shifts". where one revolution ~1.3 million arc seconds. Anybody have any idea where this is coming from?

Basic math will make you wonder whether any listener can hear a difference between chamber a' = 440.00000 Hz and 440.00004 Hz, rounding the 1.3M to an even 1M. When tuning my violins, I can hear 2–3 cent difference, where 800 cents = 1 octave = doubling of frequency. At 2 cents, that is over 1 full Herz difference. Even playing a cord with tones at 1 Hz difference will result in an oscillation at 1 Hz, i.e. peak to peak 1 second. For easy math, assume even a 0.00005 difference, which would lead to an oscillation with frequency of 20,000 seconds = 33 minutes. Good luck hearing that. 

"Golden Ears" being able to hear ten times better than a normal human, why not. But 20K better? We are off by several orders of magnitude. Maybe I don't understand that he is talking about, but I consider it complete BS.

Maybe it has to do with consistency (accuracy vs. precision), but then the a different unit needs to be used that includes time in the denominator. But even then the math/physics don't add up.

If anybody can provide any insights, LMK. Thanks!

The alternative is rather unflattering for Mr. Fremer.

oberoniaomnia
mahler123
3,610 posts
 

Fremer has to be in his eighties.  He has been listening to music all his life, frequently at high volumes.  Undoubtedly he lacks perfect hearing but he still might be able to detect the changes induced by speed instability, although I share the incredulity of the OP

bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,229 posts
 

 

Fremer was born in 1947, so he turns 78 some time this year.

 

richardkrebs
427 posts
 

Gentlepeople.

As I said earlier, we assembled a panel to help with the fine tuning of the program.

The procedure was the same every session. When a change was made, those present talked about transients, note decay, dynamics, inner detail, ambient field, image specificity, noise, and just plain old musical enjoyment. I do not remember anyone ever say that it is more speed stable and yet, ironically, it was the dynamic speed stability we were improving. The age of the ears present ranged from late 20's to early 70's and unanimity of opinions was common.  

I don't think that we fully understand the mechanism that led to this confluence of views, but it was there repeatedly night after night. I do think that we can hear more information than is generally accepted, and when you think about it, this ability is at the very epicentre of our fantastic hobby, 

 

More to discover