xiphmont

It was not exactly an accident, though the image was a bit 'wider' than I'd have preferred. Tradeoffs.

I don't like wearing lavalier mics for this sort of thing (an extra layer of complexity, and they have to be headsets to avoid vocal amplitude changing) and the stereo image reduces the apparent echoeyness of the space. The main goal was to sound better than last vid :-)

It's not the timing differences, it's the phase differences. The ear is exceptionally sensitive to phase differences between the ears below 1kHz. This information is captured exactly (to well beyond the naive precision of the sampling clock) for any frequency below Nyquist.

I would guess that's because some earlier remotes used a higher frequency IR emitter that was in fact touching into the red.

These days, the various IR communication protocols have been standardized and virtually all use 920nm, 940nm or 980nm emitters, all of which will be invisible. I mentioned the Apple IR remote specifically because it's a remote most people reading TFA will have, and it's known to be a 980nm emitter.

No. It's both.

The basilar membrane is a loosely tuned resonator. The hair cells placed on it fire beginning on the positive zero crossing. So, to a first approximation, the ear is in fact a filterbank.

There is a time domain component in that the cochlear nucleus contains nerve cells that watch multiple hair cells at a time and correlate the firing in several different ways. Some attempt to discriminate pitch, some convolve and correlate in-phase firing energy, some look for tones to end, etc. This information is then forwarded on to the brain.

However, getting back to your point, no hair cells will fire if the basilar membrane doesn't move, and it's tuned to a frequency range.

As much respect as I have for Bob Ludwig's hard won mastering skills, he also strongly believes in $n,000/foot speaker cable, which is what he has installed at Gateway. So by all means give him well deserved props, but don't assume he's an expert on all aspects of audio theory or practice.

Amen. Someone got the point of the article.

1) 48kHz sampling does include headroom.

2) increased sampling rate does not improve timing. This also has been researched in detail (because it sounds like it could possibly be true given that the ears can phase match to much greater granularity than the sample clock). It was found false in practice, and in retrospect, the sampling theorem explains why. The Griesinger link discusses this with illustrations, and provides a bibliography.

> For example, the human hear will hear a 30kHz frequency if it's fundamental is 10kHz.

No. It won't.

I'd love that too... damn, should have put it in the article...

Closest I've found is to take the .mogg files out of the Guitar Hero games and use those to make new mixes. :-)