My set-up fails this audio test - does yours?

[listening-in97]

My US$1,500 pc and same-priced external amp/speakers failed this test. I would imagine most speakers would - what do you guys think?

From

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

If you're curious about the performance of your own system, the following samples contain a 30kHz and a 33kHz tone in a 24/96 WAV file, a longer version in a FLAC, some tri-tone warbles, and a normal song clip shifted up by 24kHz so that it's entirely in the ultrasonic range from 24kHz to 46kHz:

• 
  Intermod Tests:
  • 30kHz tone + 33kHz tone (24 bit / 96kHz) [5 second WAV] [30 second FLAC]26kHz - 48kHz warbling tones (24 bit / 96kHz) [10 second WAV]26kHz - 96kHz warbling tones (24 bit / 192kHz) [10 second WAV]Song clip shifted up by 24kHz (24 bit / 96kHz WAV) [10 second WAV]
    (original version of above clip) (16 bit / 44.1kHz WAV)

Assuming your system is actually capable of full 96kHz playback [6], the above files should be completely silent with no audible noises, tones, whistles, clicks, or other sounds. If you hear anything, your system has a nonlinearity causing audible intermodulation of the ultrasonics.

 

[landzw]

Interesting read, got to say some of it went over my head but i got what it was getting at.

 

[chebby]

Dunno, my system has no physical connection to a computer so I won't be trying this.

I wonder if anyone will ditch their hi-fi due to it failing these tests. I hope so

 

[MajorFubar]

Hmm interesting.

Only tested it so far in my little bedroom-come-studio with my iMac connected to my Alesis active studio monitors.

(Yes I remembed to set the sample-rate in Audio Midi Setup to 96kHz)

Resounding pass.

Not sure if my domestic HiFi will pass so well...

 

[idc]

Brilliant article. I could hear a click at the start and end of each sample, is that a pass or fail?

 

[jjbomber]

At a guess, my set-up would pass the test but my ears would fail miserablty.

Didn't the boss of Naim Label write something similar for the Connections magazine? Something along the lines of 24/96 can only be achieved in a studio as live recordings cannot get to the extremes. Even then it would be a waste of time as the human ear cannot get to those levels anyway.

The best bit was about ears pick up changes in volume rather than changes in quality. Isn't this why dealers always turn the Hi-Fi up for demos? Then when people get home they wonder why their set-up isn't as good as it sounded in the shop.

 

[MajorFubar]

At a guess, my set-up would pass the test but my ears would fail miserablty.

So would everybody's: it isn't a test to see if you can hear the tones - you'd need to be a bat - it's a test to see if the tones create any audible intermodulation artifacts which shouldn't be there.

 

[SteveR750]

At a guess, my set-up would pass the test but my ears would fail miserablty.

So would everybody's: it isn't a test to see if you can hear the tones - you'd need to be a bat - it's a test to see if the tones create any audible intermodulation artifacts which shouldn't be there.

:wall:

First time I tried this (a few weeks ago now) it burbled on the first file, all other silent apart from a click at the start. second, and every subsequent time silence. I must say, the silnce in 192 is much more convincing than 96. More depth to the blackness, and greater sense of photonic rhythm. I can almost imagine I am actually inside the LHC (the location, and not our esteemed forum member you understand) such is the power of the spacial imaging.

Silence like you've never heard before!