T60 Limit

[Ryan A]

Not making any assumptions. I hear what I hear. You couldn't convince me the dog I'm looking at is a cat just because you're a veterinarian. Cheers.

Respectfully, you are indeed making assumptions. You are assuming that you have heard true content in these frequency ranges, and that you know what it sounds like. You are assuming that your experience is hearing sound pressure rather than feeling air pressure. You are assuming that your reproduction devices are accurate. You are assuming your knowledge is complete.

To use your metaphor, if you had never truly identified which was a dog and which was a cat, and believed a cat was a dog because that's what you'd always been told or assumed, you might reject the truth told to you by a vet in favor of a false perception. You might not believe a vet just telling you, but if a vet is pointing you toward outside references generally accepted by the rest of society and asking you to test your knowledge and perceptions according to those references, you would find through that process that what you're indeed seeing is a cat, not a dog.

Have you ever had your assertions tested in a double-blind scenario, as was mentioned earlier? Using the testing method you described, where you are in control of the test parameters, you are subject to confirmation bias. It would also be interesting to see an analysis of the actual frequency content you are hearing. There is a difference between natural harmonics, which ALL electromechanical reproductions have, and layering in generated harmonics. The effect would be completely different.

Further, if you are listening in earbuds or headphones, you are experiencing a different pressurization method than real world sound. With both ears receiving an identical signal but being pressurized from different directions, you are certainly more apt to perceive that signal from the sheer air pressure. Experiencing that effect is not the same as hearing the frequency. If you were to produce a similar SPL at your ear from a distant point source somehow devoid of all natural harmonics and reflections, your ears would experience the sound pressure, but not the air pressure. You would perceive that very differently, and perhaps not at all, depending on the circumstances.

To not be willing to test your knowledge, thereby admitting the possibility that you might be wrong, is basically the same as egotism. Basically what you are saying is that you know more or better than everyone else. That type of attitude won't get you very far in life, unfortunately.

Seems like its you who's not willing to admit you might be wrong. Its been proven by science and medicine that people can hear sub 20 hz and the 20-20k is just an easy number, a general guideline. I guess you're ok throwing out that evidence. Humans are analog creatures. Its not like you can hear 20hz and then all of a sudden at 19hz there's dead silence. But to tell me I can't tell the difference between a fundamental and a harmonic is insulting mine and everyone's intelligence. Who are you to say what I'm not hearing? Is putting a small sliver of doubt on the subject all you need to discount it? Instead of chastising me maybe you should present some actual evidence discounting my "assumption" to put it in your words. Seems like public shaming is the way you go about getting your way. Oh well, To each their own.

Good point Bill. I can see that.

Do you think it would sound very similar if I created a "missing fundamental" situation by recording the output and playing it back through a high pass filter? It seems to me, if it is indeed the harmonics I'm hearing, that it "should" sound much the same.

I'm pretty sure that is how the Waves MaxxBass plugin works. That is used on most modern recordings to give the impression of low bass without stressing the speakers.

You can't substitute harmonics for the fundamental, that sounds like garbage. If it worked, we wouldn't need 8 ft folded horns when we could just use 4 ft horns and fake it.

That plug in is basically a fancy EQ that might add some harmonic frequencies but it won't let you hear anything the speaker is incapable of producing.

[BrentEvans]

All I said to do was test your assumptions and assertions. Apparently your intelligence is simply easy to insult.

A good scientist asks a question that assumes nothing. then finds a way to answer that question without bias. This question is a matter of science, not opinion.

If you want evidence, then perform this exercise. Play a 40hz sine wave through a direct radiator subwoofer (make sure you have a good one and a good amp. and don’t go too loudly). Step it down one hertz at a time. You will still hear something at 20hz. Keep going. You’ll continue to hear something at 10hz and 5hz. I didn’t go lower than that when I did this personally last week I think it’s pretty clear that at 10hz and 5hz you’re hearing almost all harmonic distortion. Below 10hz, it was apparent that the lower you go, the more you’re hearing the driver flap in the breeze more than anything else. There was perceivable “tone” though, all the way down to 5hz. That does not mean you can “hear” 5hz or 10hz or 20hz... just that your brain can extrapolate the fundamentals down that far. Simply experiencing something doesn’t mean that you are experiencing what it seems you are experiencing, or experiencing it in the way you think you are.

The human range of hearing quoted at 20-20k is as you say a generally accepted assumption. Very few people can hear the upper end of that. The lower end of that is a matter of great debate, as there are MANY factors uncontrolled in most tests.

There’s obviously no convincing you, and you’re obviously resistant to objective tests, so I really see no further point to this discussion.

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

I really see no further point to this discussion.

Agreed.