IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Best frequency range test?
CoyoteSmith
post Dec 11 2010, 23:29
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 50696



I've seen quite a few of these only, however, they all seem to have their share of problems from not going high enough in frequency (looking for 22khz or above) or if they are high enough then they do not have long enough clips (more than two seconds) which makes listening hard. Where can i find a good test that is guaranteed to go over my hearing capacity?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Dec 11 2010, 23:53
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 5149
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



AFAIK foobar2000 will generate any tone you ask it for, and of any duration. Assuming you have at least a 48khz sample rate (really 96k is likely to be preferable), go to 'add location' and type 'tone://22000,10' for a 22kHz 10 second long tone.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CoyoteSmith
post Dec 12 2010, 02:51
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 50696



where do i type that? i tried a lower frequency in the "filter" filed but nothing happened
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Dec 12 2010, 02:58
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 5149
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



File Menu IIRC.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Dec 12 2010, 07:40
Post #5





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10338
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



Make sure your hardware is capable of playing these signals without trouble. Depending on your signal, some hardware may resample poorly causing false-positives resulting from aliasing. If this is the case, configure foobar2000's resampler to convert the signal to your soundcard's native sample rate.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kees de Visser
post Dec 12 2010, 09:53
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 735
Joined: 22-May 05
From: France
Member No.: 22220



This site offers some interesting tests:
http://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dhromed
post Dec 12 2010, 12:12
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 16-February 08
From: NL
Member No.: 51347



QUOTE (saratoga @ Dec 11 2010, 23:53) *
AFAIK foobar2000 will generate any tone you ask it for, and of any duration. Assuming you have at least a 48khz sample rate (really 96k is likely to be preferable), go to 'add location' and type 'tone://22000,10' for a 22kHz 10 second long tone.


Additionally, the command sweep://8000-10000,10 will generate a sweep.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dhromed
post Dec 12 2010, 12:16
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 16-February 08
From: NL
Member No.: 51347



QUOTE (Kees de Visser @ Dec 12 2010, 09:53) *
This site offers some interesting tests:
http://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php


A good one in terms of length and range, though the voiceover is something of a distraction.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pawelq
post Dec 12 2010, 18:12
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 541
Joined: 20-December 05
From: Springfield, VA
Member No.: 26522



QUOTE (dhromed @ Dec 12 2010, 06:12) *
Additionally, the command sweep://8000-10000,10 will generate a sweep.


Linear or logarithmic?


--------------------
Ceterum censeo, there should be an "%is_stop_after_current%".
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dhromed
post Dec 12 2010, 18:18
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 16-February 08
From: NL
Member No.: 51347



The spectrogram displays a straight slanted line so I assume linear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sunhillow
post Dec 12 2010, 22:38
Post #11





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 483
Joined: 13-October 01
From: Stuttgart
Member No.: 286



the spectrogram per default has a logarithmic scale, so I assume the sweep is logarithmic
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pawelq
post Dec 13 2010, 00:31
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 541
Joined: 20-December 05
From: Springfield, VA
Member No.: 26522



The discrepancy of opinions made me check myself. It's logarithmic.


--------------------
Ceterum censeo, there should be an "%is_stop_after_current%".
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dhromed
post Dec 13 2010, 11:58
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 16-February 08
From: NL
Member No.: 51347



Indeed, my mistake. I find no aesthetic merit in the logarithmic scale, and had forgotten I'd set it to linear the very minute I started to use FB, several years ago. In addition to that, I commonly only use sweep to test a narrow bandwitdh of a few thousand Hz. The graph is then indistinguishable from a straight line.

That means I need to redo my listening tests of my ears' (or my equipment's) upper limit. Around halfway through 16KHz and 18KHz doesn't exactly mean 17KHz, though it's perhaps close enough.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Dec 13 2010, 13:11
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 4461
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (dhromed @ Dec 13 2010, 05:58) *
Indeed, my mistake. I find no aesthetic merit in the logarithmic scale, and had forgotten I'd set it to linear the very minute I started to use FB, several years ago. In addition to that, I commonly only use sweep to test a narrow bandwitdh of a few thousand Hz. The graph is then indistinguishable from a straight line.

That means I need to redo my listening tests of my ears' (or my equipment's) upper limit. Around halfway through 16KHz and 18KHz doesn't exactly mean 17KHz, though it's perhaps close enough.


I question using pure sine waves for listening tests on the grounds that spectral masking is a huge influence in the human ear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kees de Visser
post Dec 13 2010, 14:09
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 735
Joined: 22-May 05
From: France
Member No.: 22220



QUOTE (dhromed @ Dec 13 2010, 12:58) *
Around halfway through 16KHz and 18KHz doesn't exactly mean 17KHz, though it's perhaps close enough.
16, 17 and 18 kHz are roughly a semitone apart, so on the (imaginary) piano they are pretty close smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dhromed
post Dec 13 2010, 14:21
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 1339
Joined: 16-February 08
From: NL
Member No.: 51347



QUOTE
spectral masking is a huge influence in the human ear.


I'm aware of that. Suppose I reach, say, 18KHz, I do not conclude from that that a 16KHz lowpass must sound like crap.

This post has been edited by dhromed: Dec 13 2010, 14:22
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th December 2014 - 17:39