IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Closed TopicStart new topic
Which is the highest frequency that You can hear?
Which is the highest frequency that You can hear?
Which is the highest frequency that You can hear (at normal loudness level)?
8 kHz [ 1 ] ** [0.92%]
10 kHz [ 2 ] ** [1.83%]
12 kHz [ 9 ] ** [8.26%]
14 kHz [ 7 ] ** [6.42%]
15 kHz [ 16 ] ** [14.68%]
16 kHz [ 18 ] ** [16.51%]
17 kHz [ 27 ] ** [24.77%]
18 kHz [ 13 ] ** [11.93%]
19 kHz [ 5 ] ** [4.59%]
20 kHz and higher [ 11 ] ** [10.09%]
Total Votes: 122
  
christopher
post Feb 27 2012, 04:26
Post #76





Group: Members
Posts: 63
Joined: 19-December 03
From: Bucks, UK
Member No.: 10556



I guess I'll just mark it down to bad luck on my part / problems with Audition's playback engine / some unknown black magick and continue to use alternatives ;-) I'd edit my previous post to take note of this but it seems I can't edit it? Not sure why, as I can edit this one fine. Has an age threshold been imposed for editing older posts which I missed? I'm not a frequent HA forum visitor.

This post has been edited by christopher: Feb 27 2012, 04:28


--------------------
[SIZE=1][B]Don't forget International Talk Like A Pirate Day! September the 19th![/B][/SIZE]
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Feb 27 2012, 04:54
Post #77





Group: Members
Posts: 4905
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



So I guess the take home here is that 74% of people can't hear 18kHz, and another 13% of people have sound cards that alias so badly (for 44.1kHz anyway) that it doesn't matter how high they can hear biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Feb 27 2012, 05:50
Post #78





Group: Members
Posts: 1553
Joined: 3-January 05
From: ARG/RUS
Member No.: 18803



That's mine conclusion as well.

Just a simple thinking. It's well known that 20 kHz is much harder to hear than 19 kHz (equal loudness contour curves).
But here we have it absolutely wrong.

Also notice a sharp roll-off for the results >18 kHz.

17 kHz - 25 votes
18 kHz - 13 votes
19 kHz - only 3 votes.
20 kHZ and more - should be much less than 3 votes if normal distribution (or any other similar) is considered .

This post has been edited by IgorC: Feb 27 2012, 06:00
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 27 2012, 06:15
Post #79





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



20kHz or more is the sum of bins 20kHz, 21kHz and 22kHz, so I don't find it all that unreasonable that it may be bigger than the bin for 19kHz. I'm not so sure that it's reasonable for it to be over three times the number of votes for 19kHz, as it stands at this point in time, however.


--------------------
Concern trolls: not a myth.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Feb 27 2012, 06:25
Post #80





Group: Members
Posts: 1553
Joined: 3-January 05
From: ARG/RUS
Member No.: 18803



Yep, I was thinking of that too.

Considering each next bin should have less votes than the previous one:
18 kHz - 13 votes
19 kHz - 3 votes
20 kHZ - 1 vote (?)
21 kHz - 0.xx (?)
22 kHz - 0.xx - 0.0x (?)

The sum of votes for 20,21 and 22 kHz still should be less than for 19 kHz considering my previous theory.

Or it's simply aliasing issue uniformly distributed starting from 19 kHz.
19 kHz - 3 votes
20,21,22 - 3*3 - 9 votes (close to 10).

It could be the case.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 27 2012, 06:31
Post #81





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



I don't find it unreasonable to think that there could be legitimate votes for 21 and 22, even at this early stage in the game. We are (hopefully) talking about real breathing human beings after all.

Now if there were separate bins for 20, 21 and 22 and we saw that 22 had more votes than the other two then this would be quite telling!

I'll close this poll and you can start a new one if you like. You can have a second question that breaks 18 - 22 down into individual bins and leave the other as it is, providing proper instruction that the second question only be answered if applicable in addition to having those individuals also make a choice in the first question. This way we can see if the participants are good at following directions, since the number of votes for question two should equal the sum of applicable votes in question one. wink.gif

This post has been edited by greynol: Feb 27 2012, 06:37


--------------------
Concern trolls: not a myth.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Feb 27 2012, 06:57
Post #82





Group: Members
Posts: 1553
Joined: 3-January 05
From: ARG/RUS
Member No.: 18803



Great, Greynol.


But wait. This time lets think how to make new poll better. It can be better to provide direct links to files with readme.txt?

Suggestions, please.

This post has been edited by IgorC: Feb 27 2012, 07:01
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mzil
post Feb 27 2012, 09:09
Post #83





Group: Members
Posts: 586
Joined: 5-August 07
Member No.: 45913



QUOTE (IgorC @ Feb 27 2012, 00:57) *
Suggestions, please.

Maybe it would be simpler to just ask people what age (and to a lesser extent sex) they are?
http://www.roger-russell.com/hearing/hearing4.jpg

This way we don't need to worry about aliasing noise, artifacts, clicks, spurious subharmonics mistaken as the target signal, speakers with reduced acoustical power response in the top octaves due to limited off axis dispersion, SRC issues, web browser issues, placebo effect, artificially loud listening levels, background room noises obscuring (masking) better results, etc., etc..

The odds we are going to find some >30 year old male forum member* who can actually hear >20kHz is pretty slim if you ask me.

*(heck even much past 20 years old according to some)
---

From my understanding, there are two different kinds of high frequency loss due to "age": the loss seen in the averaging of audiograms such as the one I linked to above, which is related to life long exposures to industrial civilization's noise (i.e.. what happens at 8kHz) and then there's the one this poll is asking about, above 8kHz going to 20kHz or even higher, which unfortunately is not studied as much because it has little importance to speech intelligibility or practical hearing aid design. For this top octave, simply asking "what age are you?" is all you need to know, and there are very few "supermen/women". [Sorry, I have no graph to back this.]

This post has been edited by mzil: Feb 27 2012, 09:20
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Feb 27 2012, 10:27
Post #84





Group: Members
Posts: 2425
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



The graphs show what I wrote about earlier in this thread: hearing loss starts at a few kHz.
The other point that people's hearing abilities in this respect do vary a lot is shown by this test (and as far as frequencies lower than 16 kHz are concerned I guess the test is not spoiled by aliasing effects).
Averaging statistics doesn't help here. That's why you can't simply ask for the age.

This post has been edited by halb27: Feb 27 2012, 10:28


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bjossi
post Feb 27 2012, 17:14
Post #85





Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 17-September 08
From: Iceland
Member No.: 58352



17 kHz, 23 years old. I hear 17 kHz pretty clearly but I can just about make out 18 kHz when cracking up the volume and paying very close attention, so I felt 17 is the most appropriate option to pick.

Oh, this is on Win7 with SoundBlaster X-Fi, Sennheiser HD 595.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
BoraBora
post Feb 28 2012, 02:18
Post #86





Group: Members
Posts: 118
Joined: 17-November 04
From: Paris, France
Member No.: 18179



I donwloaded the samples in wav then listened to them in Foobar (no resampling or anything) at the same level I usually listen to music, with good AKG headphones. I can hear up to 15 Khz pretty good, but that's it. I'm surprised, though: I'm 53 and guessed my audition was much worse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
smz
post Feb 28 2012, 03:51
Post #87





Group: Members
Posts: 601
Joined: 15-February 04
From: Venezia, Italia
Member No.: 12025



Strange: using the noiseaddicts.com test I can hear up to 14kHz, but with the audiocheck.net test (tone over voice) I can distinctly hear up to 15kHz. Probably they are at different levels...

Win7 64/Firefox 10/Intel DP35DP motherboard ADC/Revox B150/Sennheiser HD430

I'm almost 57 now. Last time I checked (probably a bit more than 10 years ago) I was able to hear up to 19kHz, and so... I'm a little sad now crying.gif

smz


--------------------
Sergio
Revox B150 + (JBL 4301B | Sennheiser HD430)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Feb 28 2012, 04:15
Post #88





Group: Members
Posts: 1553
Joined: 3-January 05
From: ARG/RUS
Member No.: 18803



I will ask Administrators to close this poll. A new one is open. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=93733
Thank You.

This post has been edited by IgorC: Feb 28 2012, 04:15
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Closed 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: 22nd August 2014 - 21:45