• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

So we are not accepting the research by Oohashi on inaudible higher frequencies affecting the brain?

I win my bet! 50 quatloos to me!


If that research is dismissed here then that is not a great look for the people of this forum because you can easily try the experiment for yourselves before dismissing the research.

It is quite easy to do. Just try listening to music with the ultrasonic frequencies in place and then listen again to the same music without the frequencies and you should quickly notice the difference. You can add these ultrasonic frequencies easily to any digital music of CD quality and below as that is the music that is missing these frequencies. As I showed in the previous video, vinyl is not missing these frequencies.

If people dismiss this without even bothering to try the experiment for themselves, then it's pointless keeping this thread open imo.

I bet another 50 quatloos that you have not once ever 'tried' the minimally correct experiment. Which would be to compare the same digital mastering with and without >22kHz frequencies...double blind, level matched, at least 16 trials.

Hooper et al, have you anything to say to this fellow vinylphile about his claims?
 
I'm listening to Heilung's new live album on Amazon Music HD. I know it isn't logical, but I just ordered the double LP version instead of the CD.
You get a thumbs up from me for Heilung. I’ve dug their music since hearing their first drum beat several years ago…
 
So, I let the knowledge that I'm listening to the most accurate playback guide my feelings about it. If it's objectively good, it's subjectively good. :cool:
I recognize that approach works for many ASR members. Basically, once assured that their equipment is accurate enough, they are good. They can just sit back not think about it anymore and taken however things sound “ because I know intellectually it is accurate.”

That just doesn’t work for me. It has nothing to do with not liking accurate speakers as I have owned quite accurate speakers and very much enjoyed them. I do not equate accurate with “ clinical” or other negative associations.

However, for me, while I absolutely love the chance to hear any different audio system, for the vast majority of such experiences, it is more intellectual than emotional.

I can get into music itself virtually anywhere - on my phone and my car on our smart speaker on my desktop. So I’ve already got the “love of music” thing covered.

But what I want out of “ high end” audio gear isn’t additional experience: the sensuousness of great sound quality. I don’t need it to enjoy music, but it can certainly very much enhance my enjoyment of lots of music, as well as being a quality to savour in of itself. Is that additional aspect of sensuous sound quality that actually gets my butt to sit in the seat and just listen to music through a system.

And they were actually actually very few systems that make me want to do that. Most are fascinating intellectually to me. But only a few grab me with that sensuousness of sound, which moves me emotionally. Once I hear it, I just want to stay in the sweet Spot and keep listening and listening for hours.

Through the years I’ve come to identify various characteristics and a system that produce that experience for me.

But - whatever combination of personal preference and biases are involved - measurements and accuracy per se don’t predict this for me.
 
Just when I was losing faith...someone gets it. Thank you.

Going back to your post I can now see the alternative interpretation in which you were not implicating me in the bogus technical arguments and thrashing nonsense.

I get your point now. Sorry for the misunderstanding and for my comments to you.

(in my defence I am so used to being mischaracterized in this thread, and shoved into the “ thrashing nonsense” category, that I leapt to the wrong conclusion).

Though I’m not the only one that made the mistake, you could see the mistake I was making, and I think it could’ve been more helpful in clearing up the misunderstanding.

But in any case I get your meaning now and I agree.
 
There were lots of ....and disappointment to find out.

I'm going to think it all over and follow up later. My wife was kind enough to point out that Grunge bands starting releasing on vinyl by 1990 or so. That would account for the "Hipster Factor" to a certain level. (sorry, I keep trying to use sound metaphors)
 
I like that suggestion but will have to look into how to prepare such files because I just don't know how to do it. If I can figure it out then I will return to show my results.
Well it was you who said it was easy to listen to CD quality and then add ultrasonics. I assumed you are doing this by modifying the digital files?
 
I bet another 50 quatloos that you have not once ever 'tried' the minimally correct experiment. Which would be to compare the same digital mastering with and without >22kHz frequencies...double blind, level matched, at least 16 trials.

Hooper et al, have you anything to say to this fellow vinylphile about his claims?

The only claim I made about personally testing this is that i swapped the music around myself to see if I could tell the difference between music with ultrasonics and music without ultrasonics. I could tell the difference between the two, but I can say whatever I want here. However, I did already say to someone else that if I can figure out how to do the experiment in the proper way that you and he suggested, then I will do the experiment and come back here to show the proof.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to think it all over and follow up later. My wife was kind enough to point out that Grunge bands starting releasing on vinyl by 1990 or so. That would account for the "Hipster Factor" to a certain level. (sorry, I keep trying to use sound metaphors)
I'd say the true "hipster factor" starts with the cult of Blue Note Jazz LPs, which continues to this day. These records, mostly a tad subpar by the standards of their time, have regularly been cited in the audiophile press. I'm not sure why, as these records were recorded in less-than-ideal conditions, but - in large part because of the artists involved and the small runs of their first pressings - they have become extremely collectible. Of course, small press runs, such as those for 12" singles, increases the collectability of a given title.12" singles tended to have the best sound quality of a given track during LPs heyday in case anybody's interested. Waaaay mo' bass. Early Punk and Grunge records on independent labels also are collectible due to small press runs and that whole indy label thing, thus the snob appeal.
 
Last edited:
Well it was you who said it was easy to listen to CD quality and then add ultrasonics. I assumed you are doing this by modifying the digital files?
The problem is that I have a switch on my music player that adds or takes away the ultrasonics. I do not know how to modify digital files like you say, but if I figure it out i will do the experiment and show proof here of what I already know I can do.
 
I win my bet! 50 quatloos to me!




I bet another 50 quatloos that you have not once ever 'tried' the minimally correct experiment. Which would be to compare the same digital mastering with and without >22kHz frequencies...double blind, level matched, at least 16 trials.

Hooper et al, have you anything to say to this fellow vinylphile about his claims?
I don't know if you include me in "et al". If so, then yes I have, somewhat before yours. :p

in my defence
Further in your defence, you weren't the only one to interpret the post in that way. I certainly did, and it appears Newman (based on his "worst offenders" post) did also. I think it is fair to say the post was (in the context of the general tone of this thread) easy to interpret in that way.
 
Agree, but…
Saying that a DAC with 90 dB SINAD is garbage compared to one that is 120 dB, is not the same as 50dB.
The definition of garage seems to be the next one that will be at 130dB…
I think you know I was in no way referring to anything like this. ???

Lets get back to the real world discussion.
It's simply a response to the glorifying of "enjoyable distortion" from things like tube gear and vinyl playback.
Stuff that measures little different today than it did in 1965.
If you chose to pay $100+ dollars each for an LP cut and pressed with absolute best available materials and care, at 45 rpm,
with a playing time of 10 minutes a side, yet still suffers from all the unsolvable issues of the medium (inner groove, etc?) but may almost have a surface noise level within 20db of a CD, be my quest.
Of course you will also have to pay thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars for a table with decent speed stability and noise issues of it's own. I'm not even going to bring the cost and life of "needles" into this. :eek:

Its time we get back to judging and rating our "High Fidelity home music reproduction systems" based on what they're capable of delivering to us at Twenty First century levels of expectations. Not the silliness of Stereophile reviews where John Atinson measures X SET amp as having 20% THD at 15wpc, but subjective reviewer X says "sounds good to me, highly recommended".

^^^^^^^^
"The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information? "Peter Aczel"
 
Last edited:
So we are not accepting the research by Oohashi on inaudible higher frequencies affecting the brain?
In order to accept, you need to ignore:
  1. The fact that human ear has no sensitivity to hypersonic sounds, really none, it's not impedance matched at these frequencies to the sound field. So it has to be some sort of odd bone conduction, even Oohashi admits this.
  2. That Oohashi performed the study using absurdly high volume hypersonic content.
  3. That the equipment used has significant IM components in the audible range when the ultrasonic stimuli are combined with in-band content, i.e. the gear blasted audible frequency distortion and represented findings as hypersonic perception.
  4. The observed differences only occurred when the hypersonic were combined with in-band content. See above point, it becomes clear that Oohashi is testing peoples ability to hear in-band IM distortion, not hypersonic.
  5. Study after study has been incapable of recreating Oohashi's results. These studies used larger sample size, controlled for lower order IM distortion, and used well-documented methodologies, and reported sample statistics for each leg of the study. All have found Oohashi's results to be unconfirmable.
  6. Oohashi even extended his alleged result to subject preference, using some dubious interpretations of statistics, i.e. he fudged.:facepalm:
If that research is dismissed here then that is not a great look for the people of this forum because you can easily try the experiment for yourselves before dismissing the research.
It's not dismissed here, no research study anywhere has ever been able to replicate it, even with sufficient sample sizes, and control of in-band artifacts of the original experiment. So a broad group of research efforts since decades ago can't confirm. You misuse the word 'dismiss', and associate the wrong people. In fact, those studies have found reasons why the Oohashi study is flawed (points 3-5 above). This isn't dismissed by people in this forum as you claim. It is unsupported by research. It's the same as not supporting cold fusion research that is flawed, or perpetual motion machines, or Flat Earth.

It is quite easy to do. Just try listening to music with the ultrasonic frequencies in place and then listen again to the same music without the frequencies and you should quickly notice the difference. You can add these ultrasonic frequencies easily to any digital music of CD quality and below as that is the music that is missing these frequencies. As I showed in the previous video, vinyl is not missing these frequencies.
It's actually not the easiest experiment, unless you are a hack and don't bother to control. In any case, buy supertweeters and do a study and release the results.:cool: There are lots of models to select, I would get the Pioneer Elite, since they look killer.
If people dismiss this without even bothering to try the experiment for themselves, then it's pointless keeping this thread open imo.
I wonder how you can support one controversial researcher without reading and understanding the actual research critically, including the research that doesn't necessarily support your opinion or belief. Some of us actually have owned speakers with supertweeters (I have several, and still have a pair of supertweeters lying around. They were actually the rage when I was a kid and had unaged hearing. I satisfied myself that supertweeters were not useful before I ever read Oohashi.
 
I think you know I was in no way referring to anything like this. ???

Lets get back to the real world discussion.
It's simply a response to the glorifying of "enjoyable distortion" from things like tube gear and vinyl playback.
Stuff that measures little different today than it did in 1965.
If you chose to pay $100+ dollars each for an LP cut and pressed with absolute best available materials and care, at 45 rpm,
with a playing time of 10 minutes a side, yet still suffers from all the unsolvable issues of the medium (inner groove, etc?) but may almost have a surface noise level within 20db of a CD, be my quest.
A 45 rpm LP with 10 minutes a side will not have IGD as the groove runs out well before IGD becomes an issue. I had a Steve Hoffman reissue of the Ellington/Strayhorn arrangement of the Nutcracker Suite (a childhood favorite), 33 & 1/3, pressed on very quiet vinyl. Pricey, at over $20, but it floated my boat. Something like 15 minutes a side and over 2 inches of deadwax so, again, IGD wasn't an issue. Sound quality was very good by any standard, very dynamic. The CD equivalent didn't sound as good, probably due to slipshod mastering.

Of course you will also have to pay thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars for a table with decent speed stability and noise issues of it's own. I'm not even going to bring the cost and life of "needles" into this. :eek:

Last I looked, Technics direct drive turntables, with great speed stability and little rumble, are a little over $1,000. One can find microline styluses from Audio Technica for less than $200.
I'm not claiming there are no problems with LP reproduction, but let's not exaggerate. I know you've blocked me but please, stop foaming at the mouth, it's unbecoming.
 
The problem is that I have a switch on my music player that adds or takes away the ultrasonics. I do not know how to modify digital files like you say, but if I figure it out i will do the experiment and show proof here of what I already know I can do.
Out of interest - what is the mechanism by which these ultrasonics are added with your switch? There is no information in a 16/44.1 file/stream/cd for any system to "extrapolate" to add them. It would in fact be much better to start with a recording at higher resolution that contains ultrasonics, (Say at 24/96) then down convert that to 24/44.1 to remove them, then up convert to 24/96 again so that both files have identical reconstruction filters applied. Or simply low pass filter the high res file to remove the ultrasonics.

The files could then be compared in delta-wave to demonstrate that the only difference is above 20kHz.
 
Metal tape was just for rich kids.
It depends on how serious you were about your recording (especially of the band you would be working with or the community band doing things like show tunes, swing & theatrical tunes).
Some of us where volunteering our time (to get additional METAL tapes as pay [because we had scrimped and saved for the gear] {eating beans & rice, tomato & Miracle Whip sandwiches}) because we were serious about our capabilities.
Most rich kids were busy with things other than audio (things that were more flashy and that people did not have to go to their house to see [and hear]).
At least in my area.
 
Last edited:
So we are not accepting the research by Oohashi on inaudible higher frequencies affecting the brain?

If that research is dismissed here then that is not a great look for the people of this forum because you can easily try the experiment for yourselves before dismissing the research.

It is quite easy to do. Just try listening to music with the ultrasonic frequencies in place and then listen again to the same music without the frequencies and you should quickly notice the difference.
Yes, you certainly will, because you just conducted an invalid experiment that is corrupted by the Sighted Listening Effect. Read up on it. Using the method you described, audiophiles the world over have "quickly noticed the difference" between cables (with the same frequency response), power cords, ethernet cables, CDs with green Texta on the lip, and dots glued on walls. In fact, they have "quickly noticed the difference" when they thought they had changed something, only to find out to their personal embarrassment that they actually hadn't changed the switch, ;).

Another issue with your test is the filter used to remove ultrasonic frequencies, great care would be needed to ensure the filter has no audible effect in the audible range. Without such care, one might actually be detecting the difference in the audible range.
You can add these ultrasonic frequencies easily to any digital music of CD quality and below as that is the music that is missing these frequencies. As I showed in the previous video, vinyl is not missing these frequencies.

If people dismiss this without even bothering to try the experiment for themselves, then it's pointless keeping this thread open imo.
I will re-post for you some of my older content on the work of Oohashi-san.

"Oohashi is widely misinterpreted.

"He is on record stating that nobody can hear above 20 kHz. So his finding was not that we can hear music above 20 kHz, not that music with ultrasonic content sounds any different to music with such content missing when recorded and played back, not that such recorded music (and hence high res recordings) sounds more natural or is in any way sonically preferred. He should not be vilified (nor referenced!!) as if he had found any such thing.

"What he did find was an increase in Alpha-2 brainwave activity when non-stationary signals above 32 kHz are present. Increased Alpha-2 activity is normally associated with increased sensations of pleasantness (or pleasant restfulness), and so it proved in his experiments. That's why he called it an effect, not sound or music.

"This should be of interest to audiophiles: it doesn't change how anything sounds, but it might lead to a general sense of more pleasure, at least sporadically, when certain types of musical recordings are being played on capable gear. Some audiophiles seek pleasure above all else, so they should be interested, at least, even if it isn't caused by what they are hearing, but does occur at the same time as they hear (some) music.

"OTOH there are significant caveats.

  1. I'm especially concerned that Oohashi exclusively used DSD recordings for his experiments on Hypersonic Effect. The noise shaping inherent to DSD means the 40 kHz band is swamped in noise, in fact it probably swamps any recorded performance frequencies in this band. Yet Fukushima/Oohashi et al found the hypersonic effect to be positive only when the performance frequencies were above 32 kHz. Hmm: the effect might be a side effect of using DSD and playing back the DSD shifted noise hump through ultrasonic tweeters. I'm not aware of anyone testing to eliminate this strong coincidence.
  2. Also very concerning is that the effect is negative when the performance frequencies are in the band 20-32 kHz, ie less Alpha-2 activity (and presumably less pleasantness) than when limiting frequencies to <20 kHz. This makes it impossible to conclude on the available evidence that recording and playing back music with >20 kHz bandwidth is a good thing at all.
  3. As others eg @Galliardist have mentioned, one or two attempts to replicate the hypersonic effect experiment have failed to find the effect. I'm thinking NHK (Japan's national broadcaster) and Laurie Fincham*, but note that these tests were looking for audible differences, which was never Oohashi's claim. However, I think they are the experiments people refer to as non-verification of the hypersonic effect.
"My conclusion is that, unless something much more impressive (and positive) comes to light, there is nothing to see here for audiophiles chasing sound quality.

"OTOH if you really do want to reliably increase your Alpha-2 activity and experience increased pleasantness with much greater reliability, drink a cup or two of tea while listening to your recordings. :)


* Laurie Fincham, ‘The Golden Ear Room, Listening tests on high frequency bandwidth and clipping conducted at the AES 1980 Convention, London’ (unpublished)"

Also note that the gear used in the above experiments had a frequency response flat to 100 kHz, for both recording and playback, and the music was gamelan, specifically chosen for loads of ultrasonic energy, unlike most other music. Without that combination of setup and music...no Hypersonic Effect.

Finally, that YouTube you shared showed most of the ultrasonic energy was in the 20kHz-32kHz range, a region where Oohashi claimed the Hypersonic Effect (a mood effect, not a sensation) was negative. So the listener's mood is supposed to improve if that vinyl energy is filtered out. Hello CD.

cheers
 
Last edited:
Yes, you certainly will, because you just conducted an invalid experiment that is corrupted by the Sighted Listening Effect. Read up on it. Using the method you described, audiophiles the world over have "quickly noticed the difference" between cables (with the same frequency response), power cords, ethernet cables, CDs with green Texta on the lip, and dots glued on walls. In fact, they have "quickly noticed the difference" when they thought they had changed something, only to find out to their personal embarrassment that they actually hadn't changed the switch, ;).

Another issue with your test is the filter used to remove ultrasonic frequencies, great care would be needed to ensure the filter has no audible effect in the audible range. Without such care, one might actually be detecting the difference in the audible range.

I will re-post for you some of my older content on the work of Oohashi-san.

"Oohashi is widely misinterpreted.

"He is on record stating that nobody can hear above 20 kHz. So his finding was not that we can hear music above 20 kHz, not that music with ultrasonic content sounds any different to music with such content missing when recorded and played back, not that such recorded music (and hence high res recordings) sounds more natural or is in any way sonically preferred. He should not be vilified (nor referenced!!) as if he had found any such thing.

"What he did find was an increase in Alpha-2 brainwave activity when non-stationary signals above 32 kHz are present. Increased Alpha-2 activity is normally associated with increased sensations of pleasantness (or pleasant restfulness), and so it proved in his experiments. That's why he called it an effect, not sound or music.

"This should be of interest to audiophiles: it doesn't change how anything sounds, but it might lead to a general sense of more pleasure, at least sporadically, when certain types of musical recordings are being played on capable gear. Some audiophiles seek pleasure above all else, so they should be interested, at least, even if it isn't caused by what they are hearing, but does occur at the same time as they hear (some) music.

"OTOH there are significant caveats.

  1. I'm especially concerned that Oohashi exclusively used DSD recordings for his experiments on Hypersonic Effect. The noise shaping inherent to DSD means the 40 kHz band is swamped in noise, in fact it probably swamps any recorded performance frequencies in this band. Yet Fukushima/Oohashi et al found the hypersonic effect to be positive only when the performance frequencies were above 32 kHz. Hmm: the effect might be a side effect of using DSD and playing back the DSD shifted noise hump through ultrasonic tweeters. I'm not aware of anyone testing to eliminate this strong coincidence.
  2. Also very concerning is that the effect is negative when the performance frequencies are in the band 20-32 kHz, ie less Alpha-2 activity (and presumably less pleasantness) than when limiting frequencies to <20 kHz. This makes it impossible to conclude on the available evidence that recording and playing back music with >20 kHz bandwidth is a good thing at all.
  3. As others eg @Galliardist have mentioned, one or two attempts to replicate the hypersonic effect experiment have failed to find the effect. I'm thinking NHK (Japan's national broadcaster) and Laurie Fincham*, but note that these tests were looking for audible differences, which was never Oohashi's claim. However, I think they are the experiments people refer to as non-verification of the hypersonic effect.
"My conclusion is that, unless something much more impressive (and positive) comes to light, there is nothing to see here for audiophiles chasing sound quality.

"OTOH if you really do want to reliably increase your Alpha-2 activity and experience increased pleasantness with much greater reliability, drink a cup or two of tea while listening to your recordings. :)


* Laurie Fincham, ‘The Golden Ear Room, Listening tests on high frequency bandwidth and clipping conducted at the AES 1980 Convention, London’ (unpublished)"

Also note that the gear used in the above experiments had a frequency response flat to 100 kHz, for both recording and playback, and the music was gamelan, specifically chosen for loads of ultrasonic energy, unlike most other music. Without that combination of setup and music...no Hypersonic Effect.

Finally, that YouTube you shared showed most of the ultrasonic energy was in the 20kHz-32kHz range, a region where Oohashi claimed the Hypersonic Effect (a mood effect, not a sensation) was negative. So the listener's mood is supposed to improve if that vinyl energy is filtered out. Hello CD.

cheers

You are right when you say it doesn't sound any different, but you can feel the difference as it does have a noticeable effect the brain. The gear doesn't need to be flat to 100khz or for gamelan music to be used to feel an effect. It can be felt with conventional headphones.
 
With Scotty, I've actually burned a cassette to hear how a rough mix of a song sounds on a car stereo....just like in 24 Hour Party People! Along with my home system, I was the sound check guy in this regard.

Everybody needs to watch this movie in it's entirety. I let it roll thru the studio scene to give my clip about the "master cassette" some context and texture, but yeah. Nothing touches the velvet like this movie.

Screenshot 2024-08-08 200224.png
 
You are right when you say it doesn't sound any different, but you can feel the difference as it does have a noticeable effect the brain. The gear doesn't need to be flat to 100khz or for gamelan music to be used to feel an effect. It can be felt with conventional headphones.
It appears that the rest of my post, concerning invalid experimental techniques, didn’t sink in.
 
It appears that the rest of my post, concerning invalid experimental techniques, didn’t sink in.

Not sure what you mean. I already said twice before that I haven't done a proper test to prove my claims but that I hope to do one eventually.
 
Back
Top Bottom