|
|
|
|
...what is the highest tone you can reliably hear?
Supposedly as children we can hear around 20 kHz (20,000 Hz), but this decreases as we get older.
There are some MP3s of different frequencies on this page, which you can use to test yourself:
http://www.ochenk.com/entry.php?id=63
I, at 22, can hear 18,000 Hz but not 19,000 Hz.
You may need some good speakers and quite a good volume; work your way up from the lower frequencies.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can hear 12000, but not 13 (at least, on the fairly poor speakers built into my laptop: I'm having a largely bed-bound day today recovering from my holiday, so I'm not using the desktop).
Actually, I'm a liitle suprised than I can hear that much - I've been noticeably hearing-impaired for ten years or so. I've always put it down to an excess of loud music in my teens and twenties ... in particular, a "Rock goes to College" gig that left me stone deaf for three days. Also, a play I did ("Orphans" - a coproduction with Steppenwolf Theatre of Chicago directed by Gay Sinese) where the directors instructions were to have the sound loud enough to risk the audience's ears bleeding ... the director kept begging for "louder" ... even when we were at the point where in an enclosed technical box I could not hear the DSM sitting three feet away from me either shouting or on ring intercom headset, so we had to use Q-lights!
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey David,
Well I don't have to test mine as I already know I have some significant loss in my right ear. I even know exactly what caused it to happen!
When I was about 12 or 13 years old I used to go visit my aunt in Kansas City, Mo where fireworks were allowed to be used and purchased. So, naturally I bought quite a few firecrackers and brought them home to show and use with my friends. What I had not learned was the correct way to throw a firecracker and so I would light the fuse and swing my arm back to make the throw. Well, one of those times I did that, the short fuse had the firecracker go off right near my right ear. My ears rang for a while and when I went for tests for the Navy at 17 there was no disernable problem with my hearing, but I read in later years that sometimes that kind of damage my take 10 years or more to start showing up.
By the time I was leaving the Navy at age 26 my right ear was already showing slight loss of high frequencies. I could hear a watch tick with my left ear, but not in my right ear! (Remember when watches all used to tick?)
So I can assure you that my hearing loss has continued to get worse in that ear and I will forever pay the price for my illeagal use of fireworks here in Minnesota. (They had not been legal here for many years at the time I had my incident) I now need to use the phone with my left hand and listen with my left ear as my right ear has some real problems now. Not long before I need a hearing aid I suppose.
So I caution all the younger guys to learn safe use of fireworks! Also you should be aware that it has been shown that listening to loud music in headphones and attending those very loud rock concerts will have the same kind of effect on you as my firecracker did to me, but it might take 15 to 20 years. Look to me as an example of proof of that.
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ProfZodiac
|
 |
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: August 2006
Messages: 115
|
|
|
I'm 20 and I heard 17,000 but not 18,000. Hearing has never been my strong sense - smell has.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adam said,
>Hearing has never been my strong sense - smell has.
Apart from vision, you mean?
My hearing is mostly "perfect" (except that I don't seem to be good at hearing people in crowded rooms...) as opposed to my vision which is not (I effectively only have one eye). Even so, I would say that the sense I could not live without is vision rather than sound.
I could do without smell and taste, perhaps even touch (in some ways). I would hate to lose my right eye.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jack
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: England
Registered: September 2006
Messages: 304
|
|
|
Bet you would not like to be a dog , they have a much higher frequency range.
life is to enjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jack
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: England
Registered: September 2006
Messages: 304
|
|
|
to be honest your hearing is as good as perfect to reach 20k at your age we would have to assume that your ears are free from any debies and have not been damaged by loud noise but i am no expert.
life is to enjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I made it to 21,000 befor I lost it. At 22,000 I couldnt hear anything.
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
14,000 is the last one for me
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gosh, Brian -- 3kHz better than me! Perhaps when I was younger I could hear that well too. I can't say I'm in the habit of listening to music in that range, so I've never really noticed before.
I can't quite tell if I can hear 19kHz or not. It would be about the same frequency as my tinnitus, so perhaps one is obscuring the other.
18kHz is definitely no problem.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why not? You could have ever so much fun listening to high pitched noises on your computer. Extra bragging rights, too...
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I might be able to hear it becasue I play the violin. Im not sure about that, but you spend a lot of time listening to the sound of the instrument. Its odd tho, I can tell if my violin is even the liest bit out of tune. I might just have good hearing.
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If it were possible to improve your hearing by listening to things then we would all be doing it, I suspect.
Like vision -- reading in the dark doesn't make you need glasses, and nothing (short of physical procedures like eye surgery) will improve it, either.
I think you must just have good hearing. Which is excellent if you are a musician.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When I was young I could hear beyond 20000, but now I can barely hear 13000. Nothing above that...
As Deeej says, I think you have good hearing, and by playing an instrument, like you do, you keep training your ear, and your awareness about what you hear.
Can you remember the pitch of a note?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot. I have friends who can. I wish I could. It is not, luckily, a prerequisite for being a good musician.
I can work a note out (eventually) with an error of less than a semitone because I know that the bottom note I can sing is about a G#. But this is not very reliable.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I can and I can play by ear not just written music. I love barn dance or ho down music, very little of that is written and all played mostly by ear and a lot of improvisation.
[Updated on: Wed, 04 October 2006 21:27]
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A perfect pitch?
Wow! Not many people have that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is that remembering a note throughout a piece, or remembering a note indefinitely (perfect pitch)?
I mean, could you sing an A off the top of your head, without access to a musical instrument of any kind? If you can, that is a rare gift.
I'm not sure which one you and Sailor are talking about. I was talking about perfect pitch (which is most useful when singing) in my own reply.
I can remember a note when it is part of a piece, once prompted for key.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not perfect pitch. I understand that people with perfect pitch really arnt very good. dont remember exactly why. It had something ot do with how they hear. I can actually tune my violin without a tuning fork and get within a harmonic. Like Deeej tho it may take several tries. I think its because it its somehting I like, I will tend to pay close attention to it. I dont think Im exceptional, a lot of the guys can do that. we still have the music teacher and the metronome and the tune pipe.
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deeej Im not sure that is called perfect pitch. My understanding is that that is someone who can hear a note in his head and reproduce it faithfully. but I have been told that that is a problem for people with perfect pitch since they would be agrivated and bothered by anyone else with them because they would never be in pitch with them, or something like that. Its just us poor dudes with good ears and memory and can sing decently that do ok.
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian said,
>I understand that people with perfect pitch really arnt very good. dont remember exactly why.
Not really true. People with perfect pitch are not necessarily good, but if they are good they can be excellent. (Both the people I know who have proper perfect pitch are excellent musicians.)
If you have true perfect pitch, you have a problem that others without it do not, however: it can be uncomfortable to hear a piece played in a different key, or slightly sharp or flat. Such people remember what is "correct" and something played or sung "incorrectly" jars with it. Mediocre people with perfect pitch may well find that this makes them unable to listen to music played outside concert pitch or transposed, or to sing with a choir in a different key, without cringing. Good people can overcome it and learn to transpose music or to sing by intervals in the same way as everyone else.
Before I post, I have noticed your reply directly to me. I think you are broadly right: perfect pitch can be just as much a hindrance as a help.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you don't need an instrument to tune your violin, and to give the 'e' string the same pitch as the 'e' of a correctly tuned piano, then you have a perfect pitch. Which, as Deeej says, is very rare. Like Deeej, I know only a few people who have a perfect pitch. Two of my students had it, and neither of them became musicians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the term perfect pitch is misleading. I think the wikipedia definition helps clerify it some.
[Updated on: Wed, 04 October 2006 22:08]
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think these things come in degrees. I have been known to sight-sing exactly right when I have been practising a piece intensively a few hours beforehand, but only very occasionally and in a noise-free environment. I do not think this counts as perfect pitch.
On the other hand, those people I know who have it can pick up a piece of music that they had never seen before and sing it exactly correctly, in concert pitch, without needing a seed note. I could not do that.
If Brian can pick a note -- starting with an entirely out of tune string, without listening to any of the other strings, and without listening to another instrument or tuned source for several minutes beforehand -- then that would probably count as perfect pitch. I reckon I'd need Brian to give me an interactive demonstration to be sure. 
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you about the article in Wikipedia, which gives a more complete definition of the concept of 'perfect pitch'. I'm used to a simpler explanation, which implies that the person is able to remember a certain pitch of a note relative to a concert pitch, which again isn't absolute. Nowadays an 'a' is (usually) 440Hz while G.F.Handel's 'a' could be 415Hz, which gives the music a very different timbre.
But now I'm totally off course..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sailor said,
>[...] a certain pitch of a note relative to a concert pitch, which again isn't absolute.
To be slightly pedantic, there are very few people today who would say "concert pitch" and mean anything other than A at 440Hz. If it were anything else then they would have to explain which pitch they were using in more detail. I agree that historically there was no standardised concert pitch.
I would accept your simpler definition of perfect pitch as perfectly correct, as it is the one that the vast majority of people use when they say "perfect pitch".
Thanks, Brian, for pointing out that article. I was interested to read about the differences between passive and active perfect pitch. On reflection, I have met people who were passive: they knew when a piece was played in the wrong key but could not necessarily state absolutely what was the right one. If I remember correctly, the choirmaster at school was like that -- if the organ was not handy, he would have to ask a choir member with active perfect pitch for a note before we started.
David
[Updated on: Thu, 05 October 2006 00:19] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
 |
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
I can't remember you applying for permission to indulge in interactive demonstrations with my Grandson. And even if you had applied, I'd have refused. Brian is much to sweet and innocent to interact with the likes of you!
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cough cough, What?????
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
... haven't I always told you to pay attention to your elders and betters?
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
25,000, 24,000, 23,000, 22,000 were loud and piercing..... Which played on quick time player
All the others were not audible at all but I think that was due to the fact that they were reproduced on a real player thingy.......
Could there be a problem with different audio players?
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The boy is growing up quickly and must, some time, learn to stand on his own two feet, don't you think? Shouldn't we allow him to see a friend, a few times?
This David, isn't he a good boy, too? I believe he comes from a furnished home..
Or do you suspect they're up to something? Stealing apples?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
... you simply can't trust these boys who were educated at Winchester. It's abundantly clear that their mental equilibrium was upset by exposure to ice-cold water and Lord knows what else besides. Our grandson, being so fragile and innocent, needs to be protected from such corrupting influences!
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you can hear the higher frequencies but not the lower ones, I suspect that there is a problem of some sort with the sound card or speaker or maybe the software -- possibly your computer was playing harmonics rather than a pure note. I'd be very surprised if you could actually hear 25 kHz, considering that even Brian cannot!
A computer is not really a good system for reproducing very high frequencies -- digital sounds are necessarily compromised by the fact that the waveform is rendered as a series of digital jerks rather than a smooth curve. In other words, the potential for error is quite high.
Thanks for listening, anyway!
David
[Updated on: Thu, 05 October 2006 08:33] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
A computer is all any of us have to reproduce these sounds.....
Therefore the test is by default totaly invalid.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but some of us have better speakers, better sound cards and perhaps better software. My speakers seem to have no problem with the sounds up to at least 18 kHz.
As a scientific test it is not very useful. I do not think it is totally invalid as a bit of fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
I could vaguely hear 22k but not 23k. Ryan could hear 23k but not 24k. I guess my speakers are pretty good.
Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
To clarify, after some more testing I can't hear 22k at "regular" volume, but I can hear it at a "loud" volume. I can even hear 23k at max volume, but I think I'd be fooling myself to say that I can actually hear 24k. I think I might just "notice" it, but I wouldn't really call it hearing. I'm 21, Ryan is 16.
Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect the problem is that there are harmonics, probably within the speaker, or maybe within the actual sound file because of the compression.
I've tested the higher frequencies at high volume: I can hear 22kHz as well, but I think this is not the actual frequency but a lower harmonic. 21kHz sounds significantly higher for me than 22kHz -- there is certainly something wrong there.
I think the answer is only to listen at normal volume. If you can't hear it at that volume, that counts as not being able to hear it. Boosting it is likely only boosting the harmonics. It might also damage your hearing without you knowing.
On that basis, the highest sound I can hear comfortably without extra amplification is 18kHz.
Part of the problem may be that the sound is sampled at 96000 Hz. This means that the encoding can't really represent a waveform at a significant fraction of that (20kHz +) because of digital artefacting.
Perhaps we should organise a meeting in London for everyone here, and I can bring an oscilloscope and a tone generator and speakers and can test everyone. I bet I would be the life and soul of the party!
David
[Updated on: Thu, 05 October 2006 12:23] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's interesting.
I burned the clips to a CD and played them on my main music system. At normal listening volume (-42db) I could easily hear 12000, but nothing higher - the same result as I had when playing the clips on my laptop yesterday. However, when I wound the volume up to -5db I could just hear 13000, 14000, 15000, 16000, and 17000 ... all very faintly but clearly, all seeming to be about the same volume. I couldn't hear 18000 or above under any circumstances.
My guess is that 18000 upwards is normal age-related hearing loss, whereas my greatly reduced ability to hear in the range 13000-17000 represents "hearing damage" - from the lifestyle factors I mentioned in my previous post.
Last time I had a serious investigation of my hearing - around ten years ago - the consultant said that there was little that he could do for me, hearing aids would be no help, and that he was "suprised that you did not find your hearing loss more socially disabling than apparently you do". Actually, I have good coping strategies, and most people meeting me for the first time don't realise how poor my hearing really is.
But I admit that I do have times when I really miss being able to be a sound engineer, prepare sound effects, and operate sound on shows ... even though lighting was my first love, sound ran it a close second for many years.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
