amey01;232484 Wrote: > 2: It has also been shown that inaudible frequencies (although not > directly heard), can be perceived by humans. [We don't know how]. > > I'm not saying that I can scientifically prove this stuff - thats the > whole point! We don't know.
No, I'm saying you CAN scientifically prove this stuff. That's the whole point--if there's something we don't know, we have a method that will tell us. > All I'm saying is to avoid making sweeping statements like "96kHz is > useless because we can't hear it" - judge with your ears and don't try > to scientifically prove sound quality. > That makes no sense to me. Proving it scientifically means using your ears--the part that's removed is the part your brain imagines. > Same with sampling frequencies - one day we'll be able to fill in the > blanks, but as yet, we don't know why. No, if we can't prove anyone can hear the difference now, there's no reason to believe we'll be able to prove it in the future. Now, if we COULD prove people can hear the difference, we may have to wait before we know WHY, but that's a different thing entirely. -- CatBus ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CatBus's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7461 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38596 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
