Parametric eq over 20kHz

But can you call that music?

If it conveys the realism of a live performance why not? Feeling of air… Feeling of an earthquake? My point is that we sense our environment with more than just our ears…

Earthquake?? If you were to design the audio system for a holodeck, you’d probably want to go beyond the heading range. But trying to emulate an earthquake in your living room is beyond the scope of Roon, don’t you think?

There is good science on this. Wavelength applies but it is also dependent on transducer bandwidth and receptor sensitivity. Try any decent physiology text book.

The thread is about EQ’ing frequencies above 20K. I think everyone is on board with the value of EQ’ing low frequencies, that’s where EQ actually makes an audible difference.

I believe it was Cerwin-Vega soundsystem specially constructed for the 1974 film Earthquake… I don’t recall exactly how low it went maybe dipped into the teens… Yea, people got sick from the sound system placed into the venues that showed the movie…

1 Like

Well, the original post mentions frequencies starting at zero:

1 Like

You’ve absolutely right although they did follow that by saying "Many of us have speakers that range above the 20kHz and we may want to apply changes in this area of the spectrum." and proceeded to ONLY refer to frequencies above 20K

Weather or not hearing music after 20kHz, the fact is that many analogue sources don’t have a top end limitation at 20kHz

If we look a at frequency response of a SACD or a native High Res Audio file we can see that there is material (music/sound) above 20KHz.

which I confess did cause me to assume that this was the focus of the OPs post.

You may want to look closely at the specs of your signal chain… My tube preamp will do 9Hz to 95kHz… My SS amp 10Hz to 100kHz… Speakers to 22kHz… While not the best there is, it can dig down low and relay a sense of air and sparkle at the top…

@mitr Please don’t swim in front of a sonar imaging system or stand in front of a radar imaging system… While you may not be able to “hear” it, your body will not like what it “feels”…

Spec wars. I’m usually looking for a flat response between 20Hz-20kHz. Going so far up is more a liability than a benefit. There’s a lot of artifacts in that range from acquisition/processing, not sure why you would want that amplified. Also, feeding your speakers frequencies outside their designed range may very well damage them.

Yes, saw the Battlestar Galactica film using it:

1 Like

I just want to share my thoughts/questions too:

An octave up is double the frequency. So from 20 kHz an octave up is 40 kHz. If people here aren’t into very narrow notch/peak filters then why ask for?
AFAIK is the main use of narrow notch/peak filters to solve problems (suppressing feedback loops, room mode attenuation) and not to “shape” the overall sound of a system.

… and some maybe up to 24 kHz (headphones maybe slightly more). I don’t know of anyone that has something like this …

If only one component in the chain is not supporting high frequencies, what is this all for?
AFAIK is the main use for higher sampling frequencies in digital audio for the ability to use less steep, less problematic reconstruction filters and not to support higher frequencies (at full level).
What is peoples DAC’s typical frequency range? Anybody ever seen one rated for 20 Hz - 40/80/100 kHz?
Just to make sure, I’m talking about the rating for the analog output stage here.

Note: Roon is all about digital audio - so there has to be a DAC somewhere in the chain.

Hi All,

The purpose of this is to allow for a better management of the total frequency response of one HiFi system, instead of being limited in the higher frequencies to the 20Khz and allowing the user to manage the full spectrum of his HIFI system.

According to the spect of my amplification it is stable till 100HKz on the other side my speakers (Dali Rubicon 8) go from 38Hz up to 34 KHz, so the bottle neck is usually the speaker range. With this ranges you can see I can’t manage almost a full octave. with the DSP.

Also, I don’t think this is an age issue, has this function would also benefit other younger users.

Thanks

Filipe

Nor can you hear it. :scream:

Things that no one can hear , but make a BIG difference.
I guess there are $$$ to be made…

1 Like

Hi,

I guess you can simplify the purpose of a HiFi system in to a couple of actions, but in de end they should:

  1. allow you to hear music
  2. induce emotions (happiness, sadnesses, goosebumps, etc…)
    …

Point 2 is possibly the most difficult to get but many of us one one momento or other have had it. Despite not hearing the music after 20KHz, there is music information being recorded after 20KHz, and our “sensorial”system can pick it up.

Is this concept sĂł difficult to grasp?

Thanks

Fil

1 Like

Nope. It is difficult to prove.

5 Likes

With a Chord Qutest DAC here… Pretty flat across and beyond 25kHz to 30kHz with an Incisive Neutral filter… Some other filters roll off 0.9db at 20kHz… PCM sample rates from 44.1kHz to 768kHz… And for those inquiring minds, the speakers are Martin Logan ESLs… BTY this is not to start a spec war… It is/was meant to show that there are real world systems capable of reproducing digital music beyond 20Hz to 20kHz… And from what I have seen, it is pretty common… JBL horn speakers come to mind… Into the 40kHzsss…

I did not request this feature nor did I vote for this request… I only defended the OPs premise that there is/may be musical content beyond the orthodox 20Hz-20kHz…

Difficult maybe… However Rupert seems to be onto it…

Rupert Neve Lecture at CRAS 2001

(starting at 49 minutes, 50 seconds)

Well, there may be an issue of semantics here. There is no dispute that musical instruments can produce signals that exceed 20kHz. There is, also, no dispute that some audio systems can reproduce signals that exceed 20kHz. The dispute is over whether normal humans can transduce and detect those >20kHz signals in either situation and, if humans cannot, whether it is valid to describe those signals as conveying “musical content.”

Personally, I do not take issue with wide-band systems as long as they deal with in-band content properly.

2 Likes