Digital BW, The Print

At 12:09 AM 5/25/03 -0700, you wrote:
>It is considered conventional wisdom that the ear cannot hear frequencies
>above and below a certain point, but that the existence of sound in those
>frequencies has an audible effect on what we can. Two examples are called
>intermodulation and harmonics.
>
>Modulation can be used by piano tuners, they play two notes simultaneously,
>and since the notes are tuned so closely (but not perfectly) they modulate
>against each other, and by counting the modulations an experienced tuner can
>tell exactly how far to adjust the string.
>
>Two different notes widely separated will produce sum and difference
>frequencies, and these can be even order or odd order harmonics.  People who
>use old tube amplifiers, particularly electric guitar players, prize the
>tube sound because it is primarily even order, which is considered pleasing
>to the ear (within reason) as opposed to odd harmonics.
>
>When cds first came out, a mental institution noticed that digital music did
>not relax the patients anymore and they had to restore an all analog system.
>(this was reported in the Syd-Aud-Con journal which is distributed to audio
>and electro-acoustic engineers.)
>
>Does anyone know what optical manifestations of this phenomena are?  there
>must be a reason why Leitz lenses cost so much!
>
>tom Robinson
>
> > I liken this debate to the one that went on in the audio world some
> > years ago. Studies showed that the human ear is not capable of hearing
> > differentials more than 8 bits. They also showed the human ear is not
> > capable of hearing frequencies below X and above Y ( forgive me I don't
> > remember X and Y and their values aren't important).
> >
> > This experiment was repeated many times with the same results. However,
> > if you filter music so that no energy from frequencies below X and above
> > Y appear and run a test to determine if people can hear the difference,
> > they sure can. If you run test todetermine if people can tell the
> > difference between complex music sampled at 8 bits vs. 12 bits, they
> > sure can. In fact music sampled at 8 bits and limited to frequencies
> > above X and below Y sounds pretty "hollow." It gets to the fidelity of
> > the reporduction.
> >
> > I think the same is probably as true for the eye as is for the ear.
> > While humans are not suppose to be able to see beyoun 300 dpi, I would
> > expect in a complex image they sure can tell the difference if it were
> > printed at 300 or 360 or maybe even 720.
> >
> > I always down sample to 720 and print from there.

  When I listen to Kenny G. here at The Home I get very irritated.  Now I 
know why.   I'll probably get slammed on this, but wasn't the "beat 
frequency" thing part of the explanation for metamerism?  Sort of?

AZ


Build a Lookaround!
The Lookaround Book.
http://www.panoramacamera.us