Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #161  
Old 06-22-2003, 04:44 PM
Park Seward's Avatar
Park Seward Park Seward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 4,284
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the "tones" (harmonics) are out of the range of human hearing, then how do we hear them???
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you've come this far in this thread and still don't understand how you can hear the interactions of ultrasonic frequencies, then please re-read.

The statement was about hearing harmonics, not beat frequencies. You said,
Quote:
"Playing an A on your guitar will be producing a sound wave at 440Hz, but there are also many higher harmonic tones which may be out of the range of your hearing!"
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">So how can you hear tones that are "out of the range of your hearing"?

http://academic.reed.edu/physics/cou....Acoustics.pdf

Shows a guitar playing a note at around 180 Hz will have the 4th harmonic around 500 hz at only 20% the volume of the fundamental.

"Beat" frequencies are described as follows:
From:
http://physics.westmont.edu/courses/p007/review/ch7/

Aural harmonics and combination tones: If we hear two tones with different pitch, the difference between them, i.e. Df = f2 - f1 can create the perception of an additional tone. For example, for f2 = 3/2f1 (a musical "fifth" interval), the difference tone between these two fundamental tones is Df = 1/2f1, an octave below the lower pitch. Thus when this fifth is played loudly, a tone will be perceived one octave below the lower frequency. In addition, the ear will add aural harmonics to each of these two fundamental tones, creating 2f2, 3f2, 2f1, 2f2, etc. the addition of these aural harmonics creates several other combination tones.

From:
http://www.navaching.com/shaku/timbre.html

Type of voice Frequency range Hz
Bass 87.31 - 349.23
Baritone 98.00 - 392.00
Tenor 130 - 493.88
Contralto 130.81 - 698.46
Soprano 246.94 - 1,174.70

From:
http://www.csm.astate.edu/music.html

The higher components are called harmonics of the fundamental tone. If the fundamental is c at 512 Hertz, then the second harmonic is twice the frequency, c an octave higher at 1024 Hertz, the third harmonic is g at 1536 Hertz, and the fourth harmonic is c at 2048 Hertz. A musical tone consists of the fundamental and many harmonics added together.

From:
http://www.navaching.com/shaku/timbre.html

"Speaking or singing the vowel oo (as in too) comes close to producing a pure tone with few harmonics."

So if the highest fundemental note a human voice can reproduce is 1,174.70, does anyone think there is any harmonic vocal energy at 40k? I'm not counting hisses, clicks or sounds from poorly fitting dentures!
__________________
Park
The Transfer Lab at Video Park
Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2"
http://www.videopark.com
MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays,
Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax.
Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track.
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 06-22-2003, 05:04 PM
Park Seward's Avatar
Park Seward Park Seward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 4,284
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Quote:
Originally posted by clorox:
Average Neumann Mic, huh? What are the specs on their high-end mics designed for drum overheads? I'm willing to bet you'll be surprised.

Check out the SENNHEISER MKH800. Flat to 50kHz. [/QB]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">He was referring to ALL their mics. I don't know the specific model you are referring to.

Interesting the Neumann U47 is flat to only 15k yet has a glorious sound.

And I am familiar with the Sennhauser line. The 800 is not popular since it doesn't sound great between 20 and 20k. Their graphs show "conventional" studio condensor mics at 50k to be around -30 to -40 db below 20k response.
__________________
Park
The Transfer Lab at Video Park
Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2"
http://www.videopark.com
MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays,
Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax.
Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 06-22-2003, 05:20 PM
Park Seward's Avatar
Park Seward Park Seward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 4,284
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Quote:
Originally posted by Chaasm71:
Park and Clorox, I think you guys are kind of debating two different things.... I think Park is just questioning how high do those frequencies extend such that there is enough energy in them that we can hear them. I.e., if there is only 0.0001% of the total energy of the wave in a harmonic at 18kHz, you won't hear it.
Charlie.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Exactly, Charlie.

http://academic.reed.edu/physics/cou....Acoustics.pdf

Shows a guitar playing a note at around 180 Hz will have the 4th harmonic around 500 hz at only 20% the volume of the fundamental. Let's extend that to 40k and say the sound (20th harmonic?) is now 1% of the fundamental. Our mic is only half as sensitive (again being very generous) and we will experience no loss through the air, our cable, our mic pre and our A/D convertor. So we now record .5% of the volume of the fundemendal. Upon reproduction, we hope our D/A, cable, amp, speaker cable and speaker transducer will all be perefectly flat to 40k and reproduce it without error. We then sit one meter away from the speaker to prevent any loss through the air and our ears then hear NOTHING since they roll-off at around 18k!

And for that we will give up 50 to 75% of our processing power and plugs and track counts.

Excuse me while I bow and appluad the marketing experts.
__________________
Park
The Transfer Lab at Video Park
Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2"
http://www.videopark.com
MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays,
Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax.
Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 06-22-2003, 06:14 PM
Chaasm71 Chaasm71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 68
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Hey, Park! Thanks for yet another cool link. It says what I was trying to say about harmonics, but with nice pretty diagrams and formulae. Excellent. It is at a 1st or 2nd year level it seems. Should be fairly comprehensible by all. If the math freaks you out, do what I do...skip over it. If you feel brave, peek at it later! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

I'm curious about the graphs that were shown in the link that Clorox gave. They showed a lot of energy in high frequencies for certain instruments (cymbals for example). I wonder how long after the cymbal was struck was the spectrum taken? You see, the high frequencies tend to die out quicker, and the higher they are the quicker they die out. So, I wonder if that spectrum is taken 1.0 microsecond after the strike... Say at 2 microseconds, then it is possible that there is effectively no energy in those ultrasonic frequencies. Let's see if we can figure this out.

Charlie.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 06-22-2003, 10:40 PM
Park Seward's Avatar
Park Seward Park Seward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 4,284
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Percussive instruments would be difficult to plot since they change so much in little time. A woodblock probably has a lot of high frequencies in a short amount of time. The jangling keys test is a good example of a lot of high frequencies dancing around.

And transient response is a function of frequency response.

What is the harmonic of a pocket full of keys?
Good question!
__________________
Park
The Transfer Lab at Video Park
Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2"
http://www.videopark.com
MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays,
Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax.
Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track.
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 06-23-2003, 12:04 AM
B-Grade B-Grade is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 133
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Chasm71 Yeah, she's down with the Creo. She's the Pre-press system engineer for Perry-Judds. She put in many of your plate setters when they first came out. Still uses the setters, but has switched to Artworks for the RIPS. Something about your guys's stuff costing an arm and a leg and still won't do certain things with certain file formats. She talks about you guys like most talk about Digidesign. Love em 'cause they are the big dog, hate em 'cause they are the big dog. Up there in Vancouver? Love that town.
__________________
Mac 5,1 12-core Mojave
PT 2020.9.1
HDX - MTRX Studio
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 06-23-2003, 12:17 AM
Chaasm71 Chaasm71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 68
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Hey there B-Grade. I hear you about the big dog thing! Creo has grown a lot in the four years that I've worked there. It's been quite a ride. And, yep, I'm in Vancouver. I take it you've been out here before? I see that you are from Madison. I've got an aunt who lives there. That's cool. Anyhow... Chat with you later! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Charlie.
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 06-23-2003, 01:19 AM
Park Seward's Avatar
Park Seward Park Seward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 4,284
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Charlie,

The only spec I found on the Digi site:

Per measurements on an Audio Precision Cascade-2 the frequency band-edge measurements:
192 I/O @ 192 kHz
Frequency Response: - 0.2 dB @ 50 kHz, - 2.0 dB @ 88 kHz
192 I/O @ 96 kHz
Frequency Response: - 0.2 dB @ 38 kHz, - 2.0 dB @ 44 kHz.

DUC reference:
http://www.digidesign.com/
ID:25827 Created:10/14/2002

I was told by Digi that the response of the 001 was the same at 44.1 or 48. So I doubt the ears of someone who says they can hear the difference on that device.

I wrote to dbx to ask about the frequenct response of a mic pre at the different sampling rates and they did not respond.

I have the sinking feeling that while some units will sample at higher rates, they do not have a wider frequency response. Therefore, why bother?
__________________
Park
The Transfer Lab at Video Park
Analog tape to Pro Tools transfers, 1/4"-2"
http://www.videopark.com
MacPro 6 core 3.33 GHz, OS 10.12.1, 8 GB RAM, PT12.6.1, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, PreSonus DigiMax, MC Control V3.5, dual displays,
Neumann U-47, Tab V76 mic pre, RCA 44BX and 77DX, MacBook Pro 9,1, 2.3 Mhz, i7, CBS Labs Audimax and Volumax.
Ampex 440B half-track and four-track, 351 tube full-track mono, MM-1100 16-track.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 06-23-2003, 01:58 AM
clorox clorox is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 393
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Quote:
Originally posted by muspro:

However, I don't think it would be the digital recording system that would be the weak link. Do microphones and preamps capture 200k? And if so at what type of dB loss? I would assume it would be non-existant information in the mix and would not effect the 20-20k range once mixed.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">No one cares to "capture 200k". It's irrelavent to this conversation, I believe. The highest desirable frequencies I've read about have been 100k. Let's not get inflammatory.

As for mics and pre's, they've been capturing these frequencies to the analog domain for a long time.

My midlevel dbx 386 specs: Analog Frequency Response: <10Hz to 75kHz, both well beyond human hearing. This is on a few hundred dollar unit. I cannot imagine that really nice pre's would be worse.

My VLZ Pro is -1 dB at 60kHz, and only -3dB at 100kHz. Remember, this is all home studio level equipment.

As for mics, usually all you see on the frequency diagrams is 20-20K, but you must understand that the mic response doesn't hit a brick wall just because the diagram stops. It continues on a natural curve out of human hearing range. Of course, mileage varies per mic model. My AKG C1000's have basically flat response to 20k, but the workhorse SM 57 is already down around -10dB at that point.
__________________
http://www.the-outside.com
various Macs and PC's
002r and Mbox
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 06-23-2003, 07:15 AM
clorox clorox is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 393
Default Re: Digi 001 discontinued?!

Park,

I've already stated
1) that the effects of ultrasonics are subtle, so please stop trying to prove that they're subtle. It's getting old.
2) that we hear sibilance and "hisses, clicks, and bad-fitting dentures" when someone sings, so we should count it when considering the frequency range of the "voice." As soon as someone says the letters "s", "t", or "p", it is a hiss or click that defines the sound. In short, I'm not just recording the vowel "ooo", which is what your evidence is based on; rather, I'm recording "Riders on the Storm", with all its hisses clicks and pops (also known as words.) I don't know any song without the letter "s." I'd already explained this.
3) that no one can directly hear ultrasonics, only their interactions, so you can stop trying to prove that no one can hear above 20k, which they can't. I'd already explained this.
4) the actual measurements of significant physical energy in the ultrasonic range from a world class University lab and researcher, without ties to a product or "marketing." I don't need to prove ultrasonics' actual existence any further or in what quantities; this should suffice. (Note in the chart that the piano, and thus probably other stringed instruments, have low ultrasonic energies compared to percussion,wind, and voice. Thus the guitar example you're using may be a bad one for our purposes here.)
5) The quality of the Sennheiser mic is not relevant to this discussion. Stay on topic. It is only important to know that the people who said that "you can't build a signal chain to digitally capture ultrasonics" were wrong.

Besides all of this, MY main reason for wanting 96kHz, as I pointed out some time ago, was to eliminate the mathematical errors that must occur when you have to round. The same reason banks do calculations to the ten-thousandth of a penny despite the fact that the output is in pennies.

Anyways, I feel a little like I'm chasing my tail here. I'm posting the same stuff over and over again, and it's getting sidestepped. I say "2 + 2 = 4" and then someone posts "Yeah, but I don't like the number 2. 3 is better." Then they post a link to a discussion of the number 3. Just doesn't make any sense.

I'm just proud that we've taken the thread from:

"There's no way ultrasonics can effect what we hear"
TO
"Well, it's possible they can, but the mics and pre's won't capture them"
TO
"Well, we can capture them, and and their interactions can color audible sound, but we don't know if it's too subtle an effect to hear or not."

I'm happy to have taken the ball this far. I've proven all that I can. The evidence is all there.

If you either don't understand it or choose not to understand it, I can't help. I've made my case (several times.) I'm off to another thread. Cheers! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]
__________________
http://www.the-outside.com
various Macs and PC's
002r and Mbox
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
003 Discontinued? bootc Pro Tools 10 58 12-05-2011 07:15 PM
Is 003 really discontinued? ripekeai Pro Tools 9 15 03-29-2011 07:05 PM
Digi 003 Rack Discontinued? Tritono9 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 12 06-04-2010 07:39 PM
Digi 001 discontinued? Dino Bonanno 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 1 01-13-2004 08:22 PM
001 being discontinued??? fabpab 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 5 11-10-2002 05:18 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com