Connect with us

Maximum

Discussion in 'Electronic Basics' started by Radium, Mar 13, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Hi:

    Sorry, I had to start a new thread on the same subject, because some
    imbecile decided to add OT crap.

    I am asking a technical question. No offense but please don't bring in
    irrelevant topics [such as budget]. I was asking in terms of quality
    for human auditory perception.

    What are the maximum *practical* limits of the following for an FM
    synth:

    1. Number of voices:

    2. Operators per voice:

    3. Number of channels**:

    **Yamaha's OPL3 has 18 channels

    quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_YMF262 :

    "Twice as many channels (18 instead of 9)"

    Obviously the "40,000-voice, 4,000-operators-per-voice, 10,000-
    channeled" [described in many of my previous posts] would be well
    above the *practical* limits.

    If you think, that the highest frequency a human can hear is 20 KHz,
    you are so so wrong.

    For the ignorants who believe the obviously-false conventional myth
    that humans can't hear pitches above 20 KHz, please read the stuff
    below:

    On the Threshold of Discovery

    NATHANIEL HECHT

    SCIENTISTS HAVE QUOTED NUMBERS CONCERNING THE RANGE OF human frequency
    perception for years. But it was Drs. Fletcher and Munson, back in the
    1920s, who tested thousands of people and stated that humans hear
    frequencies from around 20 Hz to 20 kHz. These numbers have been
    drummed into our professional collective consciousness by text books,
    psychology departments, audio training and manufacturer specs for so
    long that, for many years, no one really questioned them.

    Yet it has been long understood that musical instruments obtain their
    unique sound characteristics due to harmonics or overtones that
    require an extended range of frequencies? beyond the instrument's
    perceived frequency range. Spectral analysis has proven the presence
    of overtone series well above 20 kHz with many instruments? and even
    human speech? showing partials up to 40 kHz, and up to 100 kHz for
    triangles and cymbals. (J. Boyk, ?There's Life Above 20kHz ? A Survey
    of Musical Instrument Spectra to 102.4kHz,? http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk.)

    Furthermore, a researcher named Oohashi tested subjects to determine
    how brain wave activity is affected by ultrasonic frequencies.

    (High-Frequency Sound Above the Audible Range Affects Brain Activity,
    AES Preprint No. 3207.) He determined that under blind conditions his
    subjects were responding to ultrasonic frequencies up to 60 kHz!
    Oohashi determined that the mechanism for transmission was bone
    conductivity to a small organ in the inner ear called the saccule,
    which is wired to the cochlea, the organ responsible for the majority
    of hearing perception in humans.

    Another theory of ultrasonic hearing involves the rhythmic pulsation
    of the cilia in the inner ear. Prior to the observation of this
    pulsing, it was widely understood that the cilia of the inner ear
    would vibrate at different frequencies of perception allowing the
    cochlea to receive these signals. But when the cilia pulse as a group
    or groups, the theory is that this pulse is in response to frequencies
    well above the currently accepted audible range.

    There are also theories on the way the brain uses ultrasonic
    frequencies. It has been proven that profoundly deaf people use
    ultrasonic detection to accurately perceive speech and tone (M.
    Lenhardt, et. al., ?Ultrasonic Speech Perception,? Science, Vol. 253,
    July 1991). Recent theories postulate that ultrasonic frequencies
    provide directional cues to non-deaf brains as well. If proven, they
    could have wide-ranging implications for any program designed for
    placement, such as surround sound effects and sound mixes for various
    media. Further exploration into human ultrasonic perception could
    change the way manufacturers design their products. Many researchers
    are keeping quiet, waiting for more data before presenting their
    findings, but we're bound to hear more about this research, and S&VC
    will, of course, present the news as it breaks. (Thanks to Dr. Paul
    Mills, chief engineer at Tannoy Limited, for additional information.)

    Any assistance, understanding, and cooperation on this matter are
    greatly appreciated.


    Thanks,

    Radium
     
  2. Ed Edelenbos

    Ed Edelenbos Guest

    Let me ask *you* a question... is all this academic or are you making
    music (or programming a soundcard perhaps)? I'm asking in terms of wasted
    time and effort weeding through your stupid posts.


    Ed
     
  3. Radium

    Radium Guest

    I am just curious as to what the maximum rational limits of the 3
    specs are?
     
  4. What's with the cross posting?
     
  5. Radium

    Radium Guest

    They are cross-posted only to relevant groups
     
  6. sci.electronics.basics,comp.music.midi,rec.music.makers.synth,rec.audio.tech,alt.music.midi,alt.audio.equipment,alt.music-lover.audiophile.hardware

    ??
     
  7. They're selling these all encompassing solutions to people who aren't
    programmers and don't understand the workings of the systems.
    When you got sold on W2k, did you know that IE7 wouldn't work on it?
    Did you know that in 5 years you would either have to upgrade or use
    old applications on the system at great expense?
    You can't simply recompile IE7 or any other newer application for your
    old system on Windows. When your tier of technology is gone on windows,
    that's it. Like the VS6 stuff with asp and vc6 cpp libs. It means
    almost a total rewrite, and another huge investment 5 years down the
    line. Unix is a way more stable development and business environment
    in my opinion, and I've been coding for a while. Linux and companies
    like Redhat and Novell provide platforms you can base portable posix
    code on that will last for another couple decades with upgrades.
    Sure it may cost more to make your system on linux, but when it's done,
    it will last forever. Well, you know what I mean, you'll add stuff and
    change it, but the base will never be wiped out, like when MS asked
    people to recode all their apps with C# and .NET
    These aren't technology or computer people that run these businesses
    and they're taking the words of sales people which happen to be microsoft
    partners. If only there was a way they could get the facts. To know
    exactly what using MS over *nix really means for them in the future.
    No, thank you!

    Erik
    --
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    Erik de Castro Lopo
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    "If trees could scream, would we be so cavalier about cutting them
    down? We might, if they screamed all the time, for no good reason."
    -- Jack Handey
     
  8. Radium

    Radium Guest

    <snip>

    Look dude, not trying to be cruel but if you're not going to add
    relevant info to the thread then please pound sand where the sun
    doesn't shine.
     
  9. You're the one who is whining about the responses here. Try picking one
    group.
     
  10. "In conclusion, our findings that showed an increase in alpha-EEG
    potentials, activation of deep-seated brain structures, a correlation
    between alpha-EEG and rCBF in the thalamus, and a subjective preference
    toward FRS (Full Range Sound), give strong evidence supporting the existence
    of a previously unrecognized response to high-frequency sound beyond the
    audible range that might be distinct from more usual auditory phenomena.
    see - http://jn.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/83/6/3548
     
  11. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Exactly.

    "(J. Boyk, ?There's Life Above 20kHz ? A Survey of Musical Instrument
    Spectra to 102.4kHz,? http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk.)"

    That is why the sample-rates in any digital audio system must be at
    least 3x 102.4 khz. Mathematically, the sample-rate must be at least
    2x the highest frequency signal. However, due physical phenomenon, its
    safe to set the sample rate to at least 3x the highest-frequency
    signal.

    So get rid of that 44.1 KHz sample-rate and replace it with 307.2 KHz,
    since the highest-frequency currently known to be in the range of
    human hearing is 102.4 KHz.

    All CDs should be re-formatted from their primitive 44.1 KHz sample-
    rate and 16-bit resolution to 307.2 KHz-sample-rate and 24-bit-
    resolution.

    I demand that the audio industry make the above increase ;-)
     
  12. Mr.T

    Mr.T Guest

    But since we are happily ignoring scientific, physical, and human auditory
    reality, why stop there?
    Lets go for 1MHz and have another huge degree of overkill, "to be sure, to
    be sure"
    (in the finest Irish accent :)

    MrT.
     
  13. Rick Massey

    Rick Massey Guest

    I'm going to answer this so that you will finally shut up about this, even
    though I already told you (several times) that until you actually study the
    field in some detail a lot of our responses to you won't mean anything.

    Operators per voice: FM is a less processor intensive way to get some of the
    benefits of Additive. Synthesis. But when you get to the point where you can
    do things with additive, then the headaches and randomness of FM becomes not
    worth the effort. This happens, depending on the harmonic structure of the
    sound, somewhere between 52 and 64 operators, less if you have white noise
    as an oscillator option along with the sine waves.

    Number of voices: This is wholly dependent on how much density and weight
    your composition requires. There is no easily quantifiable answer to it. How
    many notes do you want to play at once?

    Number of Channels: Again, this is a fuzzy thing. How many different timbres
    do you need for your composition?

    One more thing. Imbecile is a fairly rude term. If you want people to
    respond to you, don't be insulting.

    Oh, and this will be the last time I cross-post a response to you. In the
    future, all responses will have the other groups removed, as I have done in
    the past in many of my responses to you. So if you're looking to read what I
    have to say, you're going to have to start reading the newsgroup I post
    from. I strongly suggest that all other responders do the same, so that we
    can stop all this annoying crossposting.
     
  14. Yoda

    Yoda Guest

    Better yet, just stop responding to this troll. He REALLY WILL go away
    if you ignore him.
     
  15. Rich Grise

    Rich Grise Guest

    Well, I'm sorry too, because you've just specified conflicting
    requirements.

    The only way to determine what's "practical" is to ask "how much money do
    you have to spend on it?", IOW, "budget" is the most important factor.

    There are no theoretical limits. (well, other than those imposed by
    Physics itself). If you have $3,000,000,000.00 to spend on it, you can do
    pretty much anything you want to.

    Tell us what your _budget_ is, and we'll (well, those who deign to grace
    you with their assistance) will be happy to tell you what's "practical".

    If that's "not good enough", then bon voyage.

    Good luck!
    Rich
     
  16. Bob Myers

    Bob Myers Guest

    As usual, nonsense from Radium.

    Exactly what "physical phenomenon" require a 3X
    sample rate? Admittedly, there is a theoretical reason
    not to sample at *exactly* twice the highest frequency
    (actually, twice the maximum bandwidth, but let's not
    get into that right now) of interest, but 3X is nonsense.

    For that matter, let's assume that there IS something in
    audio of interest above 20 kHz, just for the moment.
    What makes you think that you have any useful information
    above that frequency in any electronic sound system, or
    any transducers which would do it justice if you did?

    Bob M.
     
  17. Mr.T

    Mr.T Guest

    Depends entirely on your definition of "interest" of course :)
    Or more to the point, a personal auditory system that can *actually* respond
    to it in any meaningful and repeatable way.

    MrT.
     
  18. "Bob Myers" wrote ...
    Maybe its time to start plonking people who QUOTE "Radium"
    as not being sensible enough to plonk him themselves.
     
  19. Fred DeRosa

    Fred DeRosa Guest

    Wow! Peter Larson chided me for NOT cross-posting. This group just kills me.
    HAHAHA
     
  20. jasen

    jasen Guest

    If the price is not relevant it should be possible to have enough of each to
    emulate as many full symphony orchestras as you want.




    Bye.
    Jasen
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-