2. tech-talk
  3. 1025559046

What is the range of human hearing?

In the simpler days, let's say those of Audio magazine to provide an easy enough reference point, that range was said to be from 20 hz to 20 Khz. In fact, that was only good in younger people with good hearing. The linearity was far from perfect wihtin that range also, and middle-aged people, sometime after a life of working in a noisy environment, had measurable loss in the higher frequencies; 12 to 14 Khz being about as good as one could hope for at that age. Obviously the sampling rate debate has something to do with my question. I have read recently that humans may hear up to 23 Khz. This startled me, hence my question. I am not looking for theories or for explanations as to why cartridges should have a frequency response way over human hearing capabilities, or filtering in digital systems or whether tweeters should do more than tweet by sounding great to the family dog also. An answer on point is all I wish for.
pbb
bmpnyc
713 posts
 
There is no true answer. Theory was that people can't hear beyond 20k, but with people noticing differences in tone with SACD that can go up to 50 or even 100k something is missing in our measurement system. I think there is some sort of body awareness of ultra high frequencies that we cannot guage yet. The short answer is around 22k. not allowing for my sound awareness theory.
danner
202 posts
 
Though there are systems that can reproduce high frequency content and though we may be able to hear it, if we're trying to reproduce a realistic musical experience, we might keep in mind that air absorption alone in a hall will cause a 10-12dB attenuation at 15kHz at a distance of 100ft (not to mention the effect of the audience and their clothing). Recordings made with microphones placed in the near field and/or too high above the audience position that are then reproduced on such systems will almost always be too bright for my taste. (YMMV)
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
The perceived differences correlated with system response characteristics occuring beyond the nominal range of human hearing are almost certainly caused (if real) by their effect on the in-band spectrum. This would presumably entail the effects of ultrasonics on either the electronics reproducing the music in their presence, or the absence of the effects of the filters that are usually employed to remove them. But the reported phenomena almost certainly have nothing to do with some sort of supposed extra-sensory perception beyond the human ear's physical limits. IMHO.
poorguy
90 posts
 
I think the range mentioned as 20Hz to 20Khz was sinusoidal wave. If that's square wave from 20Hz to 20KHz, then listed frequency response is certainly not enough to serve the ears.
jlambrick
138 posts
 
Rupert Neve, the famous designer of high end mixers contends that the frequency response of his equipment must be flat up to 100 kHz in order to sound completely natural. There may be something about the dynamics of real life sounds that hearing tests using sine waves don't account for.
More to discover