Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:10679 comp.std.internat:626 rec.video:11171 comp.graphics:10444 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!ogicse!plains!bakke From: bakke@plains.UUCP (Jeffrey P. Bakke) Newsgroups: sci.electronics,comp.std.internat,rec.video,comp.graphics Subject: Re: Why I hate CDs (was Re: I don't need HDTV!) Message-ID: <3804@plains.UUCP> Date: 18 Mar 90 07:20:26 GMT References: <1554@redsox.bsw.com> Reply-To: bakke@plains.UUCP (Jeffrey P. Bakke) Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo Lines: 24 In article <1554@redsox.bsw.com> campbell@redsox.bsw.com (Larry Campbell) writes: >In article bas+@andrew.cmu.edu (Bruce Sherwood) writes: >-The analogy with audio is that a CD with frequency response out to 10 >-MHz would not sound better than one with frequency response out to 20 >-KHz, because the human ear can't hear the higher frequencies. > >Speak for yourself. Perhaps the *average* human ear can't hear higher >than 20 KHz, but some can. I don't know what frequency they are, but >I can hear those "ultrasonic" sonar burglar alarms -- and they are loud >enough to be painful if I'm standing directly under the transducer. Although I personally can't hear higher frequencies as well as larry, I would buy audio products ;with higher frequency responses since the lower frequencies are often cleaner. A higher response will mean that the frequency response curve will die off at a higher level and then the lower frequencies will be more accurately reproduced. This is what I've been told anyway and what I believe to be true. Jeff Bakke bakke@plains.NoDak.edu