Preventive audio check

[AnalogSteph]

14.5kHz at medium level (I almost jumped to shut it down at around 5-7kHz,my annoying area)
I suppose I should be grateful considering age and use (55 yo) .

For sure.

I've long since been aware that my genetics in terms of hearing kinda stink... hearing age 49ish or the mid-high 12000s at moderate volume, real age 42.

 

[dualazmak]

btw there is no content in the above video past 16-17kHz (I assume due to YT compression)

Yes, true!
From the ".mkv" YouTube video clip, I extracted the audio track into 44.1 kHz 24 bit ".aiff" (same as ".wav") non-compressed PCM format, and then analyzed it using MusicScope 2.1.0 and ADOBE AUDITION 3.0.1;

At my daily listening level/gain at my listening position with my latest audio system, I can hear up to around 14,026 Hz indicating hearing age is 41.
My actual age?, my birth year?? ____That is the top-secret private info at present!

 

[Waxx]

I did a medical test at a universaty hospital and i should hear untill about just under 17kHz about a year ago. I do this testing every 3 years as part of a study program since my early youth when i had trouble with hearing very high frequencies. I could not watch the tv set of my parents because of a resonance at 19kHz that nobody else heared.

But it's true most of adult age don't hear above 15kHz. The reason why they started testing me was because i'm an exception, and no it's not a gift, it's a curse to hear that good. I sounds so silent that almost nobody hear them, like i hear insects in my bedroom (that everybody have but nobody notice) during the night, i heared resonances from electronic equipment that nobody hears (but with age that luckely disappeared) and i'm very easely sesitive overloaded by general noise (I ran from the city for that).

That test that i do regulary is a real calibrated test. This youtube video is not at all. Like said youtube compression takes out a part of the very high frequency and the volume is not constant. These kind of tests also need to be done with a calibrated headphone in a silent room, not on whatever is connected to your computer in your noisy enviroment. So take the result not to serious. But take the message that it wants to tell serious, for most frequency response above 15kHz is not that important anymore as they can't hear it. Even at 10kHz it's not that important.

 

[MarsianC#]

and no it's not a gift, it's a curse to hear that good

I feel you, same for me. Some sounds annoy the hell out of me and others just can't hear what I mean.
It's getting better (meaning my hearing worse) since I started riding my bike (with hearing protection, still load af) a lot three years ago
Can still hear 18 kHz at 30, but it sounds different when using headphones and only one channel since my lift eardrum is a bit damaged.

 

[dualazmak]

I also know and actually experience that I (we) do-not/cannot hear high-Fq pure sine tone above ca. 14 kHz, but, nevertheless, some transient narrow-Fq sound(s) above 15 kHz (e.g. triangle, cymbal, antique large orgel, etc.) within some music track do give subjective hearing differences between "with it" and "without it". We can easily check it using (or not) brick-wall high-cut (low-pass) steep (say -48 dB/Oct) filter at 13 kHz in DSP.

I assume this theme (including true or not) has been already discussed repeatedly within ASR Forum (sorry, but I have not yet fully searched).
You all would please dare not, therefore, go into this discussion on this simple (naive) thread.

Let me just share, however, in this perspective, another my hosting thread would be of your interest and reference, I believe.
- Music for Testing Treble (High Frequency) Sound
Your visits and participations will be much welcome!

Spoiler: One example track

Please visit here for the details; of course, you need to use L&R HiFi super-tweeters (or headphones) flat-response-capable of at least up to 25 kHz!

 

[dualazmak]

As for the perspective of "flexible (partial?) compensation of age-dependent hearing decline in high-FQ zone", my post here would be also of your interest.
- Excellent Recording Quality Music Albums/Tracks for Subjective (and Possibly Objective) Test/Check/Tuning of Multichannel Multi-Driver Multi-Way Multi-Amplifier Time-Aligned Active Stereo Audio System and Room Acoustics; at least a Portion and/or One Track being Analyzed by Color Spectrum of Adobe Audition in Common Parameters: [Part-11] Violin Music: #643

 

[dualazmak]

Also partially relating to the theme/title, i.e. "Preventive audio check", of this simple thread...

As for the extreme other side of sound frequency, let me ask how your audio gears can go down towards around 15 - 40 Hz zone keeping minimal distortion, and how your ears/body/brain can hear/feel it in your room acoustics, by sharing two typically suitable music tracks which I referred in my post here (in addition to the YouTube sine sweep video clip in the first post).
- A nice smooth-jazz album for bass (low Fq) and higher Fq tonality check and tuning

 

[Galliardist]

I did a medical test at a universaty hospital and i should hear untill about just under 17kHz about a year ago. I do this testing every 3 years as part of a study program since my early youth when i had trouble with hearing very high frequencies. I could not watch the tv set of my parents because of a resonance at 19kHz that nobody else heared.

But it's true most of adult age don't hear above 15kHz. The reason why they started testing me was because i'm an exception, and no it's not a gift, it's a curse to hear that good. I sounds so silent that almost nobody hear them, like i hear insects in my bedroom (that everybody have but nobody notice) during the night, i heared resonances from electronic equipment that nobody hears (but with age that luckely disappeared) and i'm very easely sesitive overloaded by general noise (I ran from the city for that).

That test that i do regulary is a real calibrated test. This youtube video is not at all. Like said youtube compression takes out a part of the very high frequency and the volume is not constant. These kind of tests also need to be done with a calibrated headphone in a silent room, not on whatever is connected to your computer in your noisy enviroment. So take the result not to serious. But take the message that it wants to tell serious, for most frequency response above 15kHz is not that important anymore as they can't hear it. Even at 10kHz it's not that important.

I did a proper test about a year ago and my hearing was down to just over 10kHz. As it happens, I scored very slightly higher on this informal test. Four years ago, prior to a period on painkillers, I could hear 15kHz comfortably in my right ear at a moderate volume and close to that in my left.

I still hear the damn flies and mosquitos at night though. Maybe they sing lower in this part of the world. And I still hear the effects of higher frequency issues with some audio equipment and recordings.

O' that's what that was. I was experiencing slight fade in-out at L & R at ~8kHz and then 11kHz.

I heard that 8kHz thing (moved slightly left, then over to the right) at 8kHz through headphones. So I grabbed a pair of cheap in-ears and it was still there. I thought it was my hearing at fault. Probably is.

 

[diablo]

I'm actually 73, so not far off average I guess -

I'd decided against the berylium upgrade to some of my speakers anyway.

 

[musica]

What volume level do you consider to be medium?

 

[Sal1950]

Before spending a lot of money on high-end audio systems, it would be a good idea to do this test first:

Frequency extreme hearing, or lack of, is not the limiting factor in the value of a great system.
In fact being able to hear inner details with a lack of noise or distortion should be more the guiding reason for quality reproduction
than just if you can still hear 14khz.

 

[dualazmak]

Frequency extreme hearing, or lack of, is not the limiting factor in the value of a great system.
In fact being able to hear inner details with a lack of noise or distortion should be more the guiding reason for quality reproduction
than just if you can still hear 14khz.

Yes, fully agree with you!

 

[Ropeburn]

If anything, this thread is best for learning about everyone's age.

 

[Sal1950]

If anything, this thread is best for learning about everyone's age.

I'm not telling nutin !

 

[dualazmak]

If anything, this thread is best for learning about everyone's age.

I too am not telling it (ref. #22).
I wrote: "At my daily listening level/gain at my listening position with my latest audio system, I can hear up to around 14,026 Hz indicating hearing age is 41. My actual age?, my birth year?? ____That is the top-secret private info at present!"

 

[AdamG]

 

[Miley_B]

Yes, true!
From the ".mkv" YouTube video clip, I extracted the audio track into 44.1 kHz 24 bit ".aiff" (same as ".wav") non-compressed PCM format, and then analyzed it using MusicScope 2.1.0 and ADOBE AUDITION 3.0.1;
View attachment 423443

View attachment 423446

At my daily listening level/gain at my listening position with my latest audio system, I can hear up to around 14,026 Hz indicating hearing age is 41.
My actual age?, my birth year?? ____That is the top-secret private info at present!

15,440Hz is odd, I can hear it up to 16,500Hz... possibly.

 

[dualazmak]

15,440Hz is odd, I can hear it up to 16,500Hz... possibly.

No, there is no audible sound signal above 15,500 Hz (15.5 kHz) within the YouTube video clip as I analyzed using MusicScope 2.1.0 and ADOBE Audition 3.0.1.

If you actually hear up to 16.5 kHz, it should be your auditory hallucination and/or your system's rather high noise level in that high-Fq zone, I believe.

BTW, I will soon inform/share-with you through PM communication the details of "SONY Super Audio Check CD" including precision sine sweep, and step tones, in 20 Hz to 22 kHz (ref. my post here).

 

[dualazmak]

As I just wrote in my PM private message to @Miley_B, I well understand that there can be considerable discrepancies/differences/inconsistencies in audio codecs/formats of YouTube video clips depending on PC's OS, streamers, download tools, audio extracting methods, etc.