# Why does it matter if headphones have a frequency range below 20Hz and above 20kHz?



## keyboardwarrior

I've been looking around for some good headphones (I love bass, so I'm probably getting ATH's PRO700 Mk 2) and I keep seeing headphones with frequency ranges going from 10Hz to 34000Hz and what not. Since the human ear only can pick up sounds between 20-20000Hz, why does it matter? 
  And what signifies quality in the headphone's ability to go under and above these marks? 
   
  Thanks!
  /sincere audio noob


----------



## Head Injury

It doesn't. You can feel notes below 20 Hz, but can you feel them from tiny headphone drivers? Why bother with a subwoofer then?
   
  I'm not even sure how they come up with those frequency ranges. Grado, for example, claims the RS1 goes down to 12 Hz, but it's rolled off nearly 25 dB by then!


----------



## liamstrain

Some make an argument that if there is extra headroom in the ends, that the headphone is better and has less distortion (since you are not pushing its limits). Sort of like a car that is pushed to the limit to go 60 mph, versus one that can do 60 easily - the engine doesn't work as hard - the ride is better. Similar arguments are made for using more powerful amplification than is strictly necessary. 
   
  I cannot say one way or the other. The above makes sense conceptually - but as far as I know, does not have evidence to back up the position.


----------



## nikp

Wider frequency range = Better extension. The SRH940 has a frequency range of 5 Hz - 30 kHz and the bass goes really deep.


----------



## liamstrain

nikp - his question makes sense to you then though - if you can only hear down to 20hz - why on earth would it matter if the headphone could extend lower? It doesn't sound any deeper to you.


----------



## RPGWiZaRD

Quote: 





head injury said:


> It doesn't. You can feel notes below 20 Hz, but can you feel them from tiny headphone drivers? Why bother with a subwoofer then?
> 
> I'm not even sure how they come up with those frequency ranges. Grado, for example, claims the RS1 goes down to 12 Hz, but it's rolled off nearly 25 dB by then!


 

 I can feel the notes below 20Hz and hear down to 15Hz where it's still has like +12dB boost on XB500.  But yea requires a massive boost for headphone drivers to be able to deliver bass you can feel down low (we're talking like +10dB here even) and the headphones with this capability are rare.


----------



## nikp

Quote: 





liamstrain said:


> nikp - his question makes sense to you then though - if you can only hear down to 20hz - why on earth would it matter if the headphone could extend lower? It doesn't sound any deeper to you.


 

 Human can feel such frequencies (under 20Hz). Earthquakes have a frequency less than 20Hz and you can hear the rumbling noise.


----------



## SobbingWallet

Quote: 





keyboardwarrior said:


> I've been looking around for some good headphones (I love bass, so I'm probably getting ATH's PRO700 Mk 2) and I keep seeing headphones with frequency ranges going from 10Hz to 34000Hz and what not. Since the human ear only can pick up sounds between 20-20000Hz, why does it matter?
> And what signifies quality in the headphone's ability to go under and above these marks?
> 
> Thanks!
> /sincere audio noob


 

  
  Some of it is probably just marketing.  I don't put much stock in stated frequency response in specifications, since it seems to have little correlation with actual measurements (note what Head Injury said about the Grado RS1).  The absolute limits of frequency response are much less important to me than knowing that 30-17kHz tones are all represented with adequate volume.
   
  I think I actually can feel really low-frequency tones with headphones though.  There's no kind of aural enjoyment quite like getting disoriented or nauseous from super-deep bass you can't even hear. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  All that said, I do prefer having headphones that can handle ridiculously low frequencies.  There are bass tests on Youtube and such that go all the way down to 1Hz, and I'm too afraid of blowing out my drivers to mess with them too much.  I don't know if that's a superstitious fear or if there's genuine merit to it, but unless/until I know for sure, I wouldn't mind peace of mind...not that many/any headphones I know of can go THAT low anyway, but the lower they go, the more leeway you might have.


----------



## anetode

Quote: 





head injury said:


> It doesn't. You can feel notes below 20 Hz, but can you feel them from tiny headphone drivers? Why bother with a subwoofer then?
> 
> I'm not even sure how they come up with those frequency ranges. Grado, for example, claims the RS1 goes down to 12 Hz, but it's rolled off nearly 25 dB by then!


 
   
  Picking on Grado? Can I join?
   
  SR60i, SR80i, SR125i: 20-20khz

 SR225i, with the mere addition of UHPLC copper voice coil wire, nets you: 20-22khz

 SR325is: 18-24khz

 RS2i: 14-28khz

 RS1i: 12-30khz

 GS1000i: 8-35khz

 PS1000: 5-50khz
   
   
  All are within like a couple of db in freq. response.
   
  Still love the Grado sound and the value of the lower end models. Still chuckle at the freq. range marketing.
   
  Forget these unambitious wimps, I'm gonna design a headphone that can do DC-1mhz to match the customer's 10,000$ amp.


----------



## Head Injury

Quote: 





nikp said:


> Human can feel such frequencies (under 20Hz). Earthquakes have a frequency less than 20Hz and you can hear the rumbling noise.


 

 And that requires a lot of power and a lot of surface area. Headphones don't push enough air.


----------



## nikp

Quote: 





head injury said:


> And that requires a lot of power and a lot of surface area. Headphones don't push enough air.


 

 That doesn't really explain why I hear deeper bass on the SRH940 than, say, the ATH-M50.


----------



## Head Injury

Quote: 





nikp said:


> That doesn't really explain why I hear deeper bass on the SRH940 than, say, the ATH-M50.


 

 No, but _that_ doesn't suggest you can actually feel 15 Hz with headphones.


----------



## liamstrain

No, and their FQ response curves indicate that it should be the opposite. But the deeper frequency extension of the Shure doesn't explain why you hear that either. Something else may be at work in this circumstance.


----------



## RexAeterna

it's the seal and absorption properties of the cups that allows for sub-bass to be felt and heard. open headphones tend to have deeper bass extension better cause there is place where the soundwave can escape from and reflect back in or around your head. it's actually easier to get a full-range headphone driver to extend down to 20hz since it need lot less motion to achieve that frequency band compared to actual fullrange speakers where you might need specially designed complex speaker cabs to allow the air to travel and then you need good enough bass traps so your room can capture and absorb those low frequencies. headphones are very different. most headphones actually have a harder time reaching the air frequencies and above cause they're usually purposely rolled-off so it'll be hard to actually have headphones that can extend up to 20khz flat,but that's of course if your hearing is up to the task of hearing that high still.

the frequency specs on headphones are all marketing. people should know that by now.


----------



## nikp

Quote: 





rexaeterna said:


> the frequency specs on headphones are all marketing. people should know that by now.


 
   
  I'm aware of that but I still get that feeling that < 20Hz can be felt. Not heard but felt.


----------



## RPGWiZaRD

Quote: 





head injury said:


> No, but _that_ doesn't suggest you can actually feel 15 Hz with headphones.


 
   
  I can! >_< 
   
  Try 
   
  XB700, XB500, V-Moda Crossfade LP2, at least these have the capability. I can feel the bass literally tickling my ears on XB500 in lots of songs that for example have a bassdrop that goes like from 100Hz towards 0Hz I can still feel it for a little moment after I stop hearing it, especially when paired with ZO even if set to the lowest contour levels. The headphones with capable drivers are just very few but the differences compared to speakers/subwoofers is obviously that only our ears feels it when the speaker can make our whole body feel it.


----------



## Head Injury

Have you tried test tones? 20 Hz is the limit of hearing, but you feel notes that deep too. Just because you stop hearing it and start feeling it doesn't mean you're listening to a 15 Hz frequency. It also doesn't mean you're hearing anything but additional harmonics created by THD.


----------



## nikp

Quote: 





head injury said:


> Have you tried test tones? 20 Hz is the limit of hearing, but you feel notes that deep too. Just because you stop hearing it and start feeling it doesn't mean you're listening to a 15 Hz frequency. It also doesn't mean you're hearing anything but additional harmonics created by THD.


 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0wIyIUrCgQ
   
  Are these accurate?


----------



## RPGWiZaRD

Quote: 





head injury said:


> Have you tried test tones? 20 Hz is the limit of hearing, but you feel notes that deep too. Just because you stop hearing it and start feeling it doesn't mean you're listening to a 15 Hz frequency. It also doesn't mean you're hearing anything but additional harmonics created by THD.


 

 Yes I've been using test tones "Test Tone Generator" which I found to be the best one with cleanest tones to test my hearing limits. I'm fully aware of the additional noise that can be heard sometimes but I'm not speaking of that, I'm speaking only of that clean bassnote. I was able to hear the extra noise down to 12 or 13Hz but that wasn't a constant low hum tone but sounded like the sound that comes from helicopter's rotating wings at a bit slower speed so I automaticly ruled out that but at 15Hz I heard the constant onenote humming but it was veeeeeery subtle at 15Hz but 16Hz it was already much easier to hear so my hearing capability takes a quick dive between 16 to 15Hz and 14Hz I can't hear whatsoever, 20Hz is already very loud and clear and I'm not adjusting volume levels I just used a fixed volume level I would use normally when listening to music.
   
  Believing in that EVERY human's hearing limits are the same is just as ******** as no1 notices any difference in motion above 60 frames per second... personally I believe it varies for every person a bit and we're probably talking around 14 - 22Hz or so possibly.


----------



## Head Injury

Quote: 





nikp said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0wIyIUrCgQ
> 
> Are these accurate?


 

 Use something that actually tells you what frequency is playing at what time. I doubt it's accurate because I hear noise right from the beginning, and I rarely hear or feel 20 Hz at my listening volume.
   
  RPGWizard, if you are actually _hearing_ 15 Hz then it's probably just harmonics.


----------



## RPGWiZaRD

Quote: 





head injury said:


> RPGWizard, if you are actually _hearing_ 15 Hz then it's probably just harmonics.


 
   
  No, it's that same tone/hum I'm hearing at say 30Hz but much lower pitched. I know what to listen for, I'm not a noob, I know what the harmonics is and what isn't, as I said I could hear harmonics down to was it 12 or was it 13Hz but I didn't count that. The 15Hz is just veeeery faint though (just barely standing out from natural background noise when focusing to listen for it) when using normal listening volume levels. Look, it's not like I'm the first guy to admit hearing down to 15Hz, seen others claming the same thing as well. While 15Hz is somewhat questionable and I probably won't hear that for a long time anymore but say 17-18Hz for example is very clear which is still lower than 20Hz.


----------



## nikp

I just used audacity and I can hear 15Hz at a slightly loud listening volume. And no it's not harmonics, I study sound physics.


----------



## RPGWiZaRD

Quote: 





nikp said:


> I just used audacity and I can hear 15Hz at a slightly loud listening volume. And no it's not harmonics, I study sound physics.


 

 Yea I've tested with audacity too but I found it to produce more harmonics than Test Tone Generator. It's a free to try for 30 or 60 days or whatever and has some nifty features and GUI.
   
  Most headphones have such a roll-off below 20Hz so you really have to increase the volume a lot to hear it or they might not even be able to produce a clean tone either. The XB500 still has like +12dB boost at 15Hz for example so that speaks both for that I don't have to increase the volume past "normal" listening volume and that it would have any issues producing a 15Hz tone, but I can also hear it with HTF600 so it's not only XB500.


----------



## nikp

Tried the test tone generator and I can still hear it faintly. It's probably more of a feel (tiny rumble).


----------



## RexAeterna

nikp said:


> I'm aware of that but I still get that feeling that < 20Hz can be felt. Not heard but felt.





yes. you can still feel the vibrations from 20hz. if your sensitive to vibrations as well when standing you can actually feel the vibrations travel down to bottom of your feet since your bones acts as an absorber and allows the waves to travel like an open road. i don't know if anyone else noticed this as well.

EDIT: had to edit cause i didn't realize this thread moved so fast.


----------



## Blue Boat

I measure extension by going from 80Hz downwards.
   
  Once the tone starts to sound like the helicopter rotor blades (that womp womp womp sound), that's the limit of my headphone's bass extension. I think this is what you call harmonics? Solid tones that go WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMP (constant low hum) are considered true tones. 
   
  Edit: Will post SR60's exact point where the bass disappears.


----------



## RPGWiZaRD

Quote: 





blue boat said:


> I measure extension by going from 80Hz downwards.
> 
> Once the tone starts to sound like the helicopter rotor blades (that womp womp womp sound), that's the limit of my headphone's bass extension. I think this is what you call harmonics? Solid tones that go WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMP (constant low hum) are considered true tones.
> 
> Edit: Will post SR60's exact point where the bass disappears.


 

 Yea this is how I go about this too.


----------



## ineedmorebase

Quote: 





nikp said:


> I'm aware of that but I still get that feeling that < 20Hz can be felt. Not heard but felt.


 


  You can hear it, at least definitley percieve it, it's kind of strange but when you experiement with subwoofers and bass responses/deepness, you'l start to understand a little bit better


----------



## Blue Boat

HD 438 : Volume of tone starts to decrease at 50-51 Hz. Below 40Hz, things start to sound a little wobbly. Below 32Hz, there's no more hum left. There's sound all the way down to 10Hz, but
                there's a vibration sound accompanied by a very faint wobble wobble sound. I doubt the new HD439s will be any better than the HD438s.
  SR 60 : 35-39 is the limit. Below that it's too soft, and I have to turn the volume up to 0db. Bass starts rolling off at 68Hz. Noticeably less loud at 50ish Hz(s).


----------



## k00zk0

I just tried some sine testing and correct me if I'm wrong:
   
  At 40 hz, at a moderate level there is a steady hum. Turning the volume up, as the hum gets louder a quickly repeating whomp appears with each cycle. Is this the distortion or limit that is being referred to? Going to 30hz makes the whomp appear at a lower volume level
   
  Is the whomp caused by the driver now not mirroring the sine being input but slightly squaring the wave off as the excursion limit is hit? So a headphone rated to extend to 12hz will actually produce 12hz steady hum at an audible level without distorting it into the hum plus whomp with each throw?
   
  Edit: wow nevermind. Generating low sines made me just realize how horrible this output device is. Clear high pitched buzz while producing high level bass sines - this is NOT caused by the headphone, right?
   
  As well, the sub bass can definitely be felt. The earlobes are sensitive to it with headphones and the entire head can be felt to shake with enough excursion. I mean, if you can feel the outside of the phone vibrating with your fingers then you are feeling the bass with your head too...


----------



## Blue Boat

I don't know either.
   
  But at some point, the bass tone seems to start getting softer. This is roll-off, I believe.
  As I decreased the frequency of the wave, the drivers start to rattle. I think this is distortion.
  It's hard (for me) to pinpoint when it stops producing the actual bass tone...


----------



## anetode

It's fairly easy to get a headphone to make audible noise while feeding it infrasonic frequencies. Running a signal to a D7000 through a Little Dot tube amp, I get all sorts of warbles from the harmonics.
   
  Even so, hearing 15hz doesn't necessarily mean that you're full of it; it's not that far away along the normal distribution. I doubt there's anything below 15hz, though there have been interesting experiments conducted on the effect of exposure to infrasonic frequencies. If for whatever reason you're listening so low, prepare for a good chance of queasiness and anxiety.
   
  Or you can buy a contraption that claims to sync with your brainwaves and imagine all sorts of sounds and effects.


----------



## Blue Boat

Quote: 





anetode said:


> It's fairly easy to get a headphone to make audible noise while feeding it subsonic frequencies.


 

 What do you mean by subsonic? Slower than the speed of sound?


----------



## nick_charles

Quote: 





anetode said:


> I doubt there's anything below 15hz,
> 
> *Some very specialized pipe organs (Atlantic City Boardwalk iirc) could get down to about 8hz*


----------



## anetode

Quote: 





blue boat said:


> What do you mean by subsonic? Slower than the speed of sound?


 


   






 typo, i meant infrasonic
   

  
  Quote: 





nick_charles said:


> *Some very specialized pipe organs (Atlantic City Boardwalk iirc) could get down to about 8hz*


 
   
  I meant "anything that one could hear" rather than any sound sources that generate those frequencies. Though I bet elephants would dig that pipe organ.


----------



## JohnRichard

As one who goes out of his way to collect gear that accurately reproduces the full frequency spectrum, from lab testing I have to say:
   
  But isn't it part of the experience?
   
  I'm a working musician.  I experience things outside of the 20-20 range every day.   Part of the appeal of Pipe Organs is their ability to represent different instruments/voices in a clear sound field along with everything else.  When Bach designed organs, he refer ed to some having thunderous bass.  We know today, that those bass pipes went down below 10Hz all the time.   It's part of the experience of the Pipe Organ.   Some of the Mixture stops have pipes that scream above 20kHz, and people tune them by tuning the harmonics they produce that we can hear... talk about voodoo magic...
   
  The point is, humans may not be able to register something above 20,000 cycles per second, but if we walked around with a filter on our ears, I guarantee people would state something was missing.   I say all that to say this:  It DOES matter.  Watch an RTA (that can read up above 40,000Hz), and see just what happens up there.   Do blind tests.  I bet you will be able to tell a difference.
   
   
  An argument for it Does NOT matter:
   
   
  The hard part is going to be finding equipment that doesn't cut frequencies, or just roll off anything other than 20-20... which I hate.
   
  Then, think about your source material.  CD's go to 22kHz or so.   How is a 24/96 recording going to sound better than a CD, if it was made from the CD master.  If it was made from an analogue master, perhaps.  If it was made from a digital recording?  It's likely already 24/96 and the publisher just put it in a format you can hear.
   
  And then, was the source recorded on mics that can actually hear up past 40kHz?  You got to have very sensitive recording equipment to do that. 
   
  In the end, pay attention to what your SOURCE is.  If you are lissening to CD's, MP3's, FLAC... better check to see that there is actually sound info in those registers before you buy a headset that can do 1000000000Hz.


----------



## liamstrain

Just a quick correction - It takes a 32 foot pipe, to generate 16hz. There are only a few 64' pipe organs generating 8hz or lower - and are hardly common (less so even in Bach's day - even with combined pedal stops, and are usually a stopped 32'). These are more felt than heard - which given the amount of air they move - makes sense. 
   
   
  Interesting note - I was once photographing Westminster Abbey while the sanctuary was closed to the public. Only an organist was practicing in the space. I have a few photographs when he apparently opened up the big pipes. Everything in the photograph is tack sharp - except the pipe casings which are blurred madly from those big vibrations.


----------



## HiFiMarx

Usually the average human hearing range is about 20Hz-20Khz. So theoretically the frequency response range does not matter as long as it is 20Hz-20Khz.
 However, If you want to feel the bass or have the headphones wobble against your ears you will need headphones with the approximate frequency range of 8Hz-23Khz.
 This would be best. Also there are a cheap pair of headphones from JVC called the Xtreme Xplosives, or more specifically the HA-M55X. These are priced around $50.00. They are pretty decent. There are others as well.


----------



## squallkiercosa




----------



## mark_h

Hello...Paging Dr. Head-Fi? Are there any cognitive neuroscientists, (specializing in frequency dispersion in the basilar membrane) attending in the house?


----------



## Trae

Thou thread has risen from the depths of the deepwebz 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



  
 Anyways, every headphone/iem/speaker can go as low as 1Hz if you use a tone generator (with the exception of crossfaders changing the frequency band). For my headphones, I can feel all the way down to 2Hz, no joke. My headphones have an IEM-like seal around my ears, and the pressure changes within that sealed area are very noticeable. I did the same test to some old bose cube speakers, and they could do 1Hz too. 
  
 Really, you shouldn't care about frequency ranges on headphones, unless they're really bad or something. I'm thinking that on some headphones that don't have a wide frequency range (take some IEMs, for instance) are rated under 20 kHz because the electromagnetic field that is generated from the magnet that moves the voice coil isn't strong and dense enough to properly control the coil at super low or super high frequencies. The denser the magnet is, and the stronger the electromagnetic field is around the voice coil, the more accurate it's able to move that driver around. So, headphones can get down to super low hz ranges, and possibly up to very high ranges, but mechanical distortion and frequency reproduction inaccuracies may be prone to influencing the quality of the sound made from the drivers, especially when the sound is being produced at a loud volume level. That's just my guess. Could be wrong. 
  
 I would talk about sources and whatnot, but I think JohnRichard did a good job explaining that already.


----------



## bigshot

The balance of the frequencies you can actually hear is MUCH more important than the existence of ones you can't hear.


----------



## hankypanky2

bigshot said:


> The balance of the frequencies you can actually hear is MUCH more important than the existence of ones you can't hear.


 
 Can u reword this please, thanks.


----------



## bigshot

The sound you can hear matters a lot more than the sound you can't.


----------



## SilentFrequency

Is it true then that the frequencies you can't hear, you can sometimes feel?


----------



## hankypanky2

silentfrequency said:


> Is it true then that the frequencies you can't hear, you can sometimes feel?


 
 I listen to House and EDM music and my Steez Effects headphones have 

Frequency​_6 - 28,000 Hz_​
  
 And I get chills down my spine when I'm listening to it on the go.


----------



## liamstrain

hankypanky2 said:


> I listen to House and EDM music and my Steez Effects headphones have
> 
> Frequency​_6 - 28,000 Hz_​
> 
> And I get chills down my spine when I'm listening to it on the go.


 
  
 That has to do with the interaction of your cognitive processes and what you hear, with the hypothalamus, not necessarily what you don't hear (or sub bass, or anything). I get shivers like that when I hear the sound of a brush on canvas. It's subjective emotional response and physiological arousal at a low level, triggering the hypothalamus --> adrenaline. 

 *shrug*  people are funny.


----------



## SilentFrequency

Maybe musics human emotional responses delivered by whatever method just can't be measured objectively?


----------



## bigshot

hankypanky2 said:


> I listen to House and EDM music and my Steez Effects headphones have
> 
> Frequency​_6 - 28,000 Hz_​


 
  
 That is half a response rating. Without the +/- dB part it doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot.


----------



## kraken2109

bigshot said:


> That is half a response rating. Without the +/- dB part it doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot.


 
 Exactly - it means nothing. Anything can be made to vibrate at any frequency, therefore anything can have a near-infinite frequency response.
 What matters is how flat it is.


----------



## Head Injury

hankypanky2 said:


> Frequency​_6 - 28,000 Hz_​


 

 My favorite example of this kind of frequency response spec is Grado. As you move up their product range, they advertise a larger and larger range of frequencies, from 20 - 20,000 on the SR60 to 5 - 50,000 on the PS1000. The actual extension is virtually the same. Both are down to about -40 dB at 20 Hz and -35 dB at 20 kHz. And neither is exactly linear at any frequency. It's even more controversial because they've always been rumored to use the same drivers throughout most of their product line, and indeed the SR225 measures nearly identical to the PS1000 when equipped with the same pads.
  
 If you still think this spec means _anything_ after seeing that, you're being silly.


----------



## SilentFrequency

head injury said:


> My favorite example of this kind of frequency response spec is Grado. As you move up their product range, they advertise a larger and larger range of frequencies, from 20 - 20,000 on the SR60 to 5 - 50,000 on the PS1000. The actual extension is virtually the same. Both are down to about -40 dB at 20 Hz and -35 dB at 20 kHz. And neither is exactly linear at any frequency. It's even more controversial because they've always been rumored to use the same drivers throughout most of their product line, and indeed the SR225 measures nearly identical to the PS1000 when equipped with the same pads.
> 
> If you still think this spec means _anything_ after seeing that, you're being silly.




I actually checked pricing of the two Grado headphones you mentioned and they are totally different in a major way.

So basically if you purchased the SR225, they sound the same as the PS1000?


----------



## liamstrain

silentfrequency said:


> I actually checked pricing of the two Grado headphones you mentioned and they are totally different in a major way.
> 
> So basically if you purchased the SR225, they sound the same as the PS1000?


 
  
 When you put on the same pads, they get close. Grado's argument is they use drivers which match each other better, as you go up the tiers, as well as tuning in the cups. I happen to prefer the RS1s over my older 225's - but they are very similar sounding headphones.


----------



## SilentFrequency

liamstrain said:


> When you put on the same pads, they get close. Grado's argument is they use drivers which match each other better, as you go up the tiers, as well as tuning in the cups. I happen to prefer the RS1s over my older 225's - but they are very similar sounding headphones.




Wow, I'm really surprised that the price difference does not correlate with the sound of the headphones you mention but I guess maybe they sound different enough for some to choose the more expensive model.


----------



## marla

It's not true that humans can only hear 20-20,000 Hz. I'd like to know where you heard that. Mine is beyond that at both ends. I really like bass sounds too so that's most important to me. I have some JVC headphones that go down to 16 Hz which is great but the headphone jack on my phone just wore out, so now I'm looking for Bluetooth ones. Back in the 80's I had some that not only went down to 16, but up to 40,000. That was really great. But its not just being able to hear all the sound created, when a note plays beyond the speakers frequency response, it comes out as static and that is really annoying to me.


----------



## bigshot

How far beyond 20kHz do you think you can hear, and how large of a range do you think that your supposed extended frequency perception represents? Did you determine your ability to hear extended super audible frequencies with tones at a fixed volume?


----------



## kraken2109

marla said:


> It's not true that humans can only hear 20-20,000 Hz. I'd like to know where you heard that. Mine is beyond that at both ends. I really like bass sounds too so that's most important to me. I have some JVC headphones that go down to 16 Hz which is great but the headphone jack on my phone just wore out, so now I'm looking for Bluetooth ones. Back in the 80's I had some that not only went down to 16, but up to 40,000. That was really great. But its not just being able to hear all the sound created, when a note plays beyond the speakers frequency response, it comes out as static and that is really annoying to me.


 
 None of what you've posted is correct.


----------



## dprimary

I high pass all my music at 21kHz and leave it blasting all day and night I have yet to get any complaints.


----------



## castleofargh

marla said:


> It's not true that humans can only hear 20-20,000 Hz. I'd like to know where you heard that. Mine is beyond that at both ends. I really like bass sounds too so that's most important to me. I have some JVC headphones that go down to 16 Hz which is great but the headphone jack on my phone just wore out, so now I'm looking for Bluetooth ones. Back in the 80's I had some that not only went down to 16, but up to 40,000. That was really great. But its not just being able to hear all the sound created, when a note plays beyond the speakers frequency response, it comes out as static and that is really annoying to me.


 

 so I get it you're past your 40, yet you try to make us believe that your hearing is beyond 20hz-20khz. nice try space alien!


----------



## bigshot

I thought it was interesting that he seemed to think because back in the 70s his speakers were advertised as going up to 40kHz, that meant that he could hear up that high himself. I'm trying to wrap my head around the logic of that, but I'm having trouble with it. Is he saying that since he paid good money for speakers that go up to 40kHz, he damn well better get his money's worth and hear it?


----------



## arnyk

keyboardwarrior said:


> I've been looking around for some good headphones (I love bass, so I'm probably getting ATH's PRO700 Mk 2) and I keep seeing headphones with frequency ranges going from 10Hz to 34000Hz and what not. Since the human ear only can pick up sounds between 20-20000Hz, why does it matter?
> And what signifies quality in the headphone's ability to go under and above these marks?
> 
> Thanks!
> /sincere audio noob


 
  
 Frequency response specs on speakers and headphones even with a dB spec can't be taken to the bank. IME, taking them seriously is a true sign of a newbie. Skip over them.


----------



## TAMAL

Hope this thread hasn't died yet.

Came across this link today : http://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php

I want to know how reliable this website is ( & the test file provided) ?
...Regarding that, using the test tone I am able to hear upto 19kHz in my usual hearing volume & upto 20kHz at full volume !? 

Any help will be appreciated.


----------



## cjl

Be very careful with high volume at high frequencies - you could damage your speakers, your hearing, or both.


----------



## TAMAL

cjl said:


> Be very careful with high volume at high frequencies - you could damage your speakers, your hearing, or both.




Thanks for the reply, and the advice also.  I was actually asking about the reliability of the website I linked previously. Is that the right place to test hearing ?


----------



## TAMAL

Bump. Is there anyone who may answer my question I've already asked ?


----------



## RRod

I've never found anything wrong with the test files. Anything in particular you're wanting to try?


----------



## TAMAL

rrod said:


> I've never found anything wrong with the test files. Anything in particular you're wanting to try?




No, I'm just a little concerned... am I supposed to hear 20KHz ? Is my hearing that good ? 
Just curious...


----------



## RRod

tamal said:


> No, I'm just a little concerned... am I supposed to hear 20KHz ? Is my hearing that good ?
> Just curious...


 
  
 Well you said you had to turn up the volume full blast, so it's perfectly possible you can detect 20kHz at that amplitude.


----------



## TAMAL

rrod said:


> Well you said you had to turn up the volume full blast, so it's perfectly possible you can detect 20kHz at that amplitude.




I was listening from my mobile & it doesn't have much volume. 
Also, I've previously mentioned that I could hear 19K at my usual listening volumep


----------



## cjl

It's possible that your playback chain isn't good at pure 19-20kHz tones and there's some audible distortion. It's also possible that you have excellent hearing.


----------



## castleofargh

tamal said:


> rrod said:
> 
> 
> > Well you said you had to turn up the volume full blast, so it's perfectly possible you can detect 20kHz at that amplitude.
> ...


 

 could be some high IMD?
 here on a mobile it's probably not too much of a concern, but just as a usual warning, do not rise the listening level when doing hearing tests! first because the all purpose of the test is to estimate your ability at *normal listening levels*. but also because even when not audible, some high frequencies can very much pack up enough energy to damage your ears so rising the level on frequencies we don't hear can be dangerous.


----------



## JaZZ

One argument in favor of a bandwidth exceeding 20 Hz and 20 kHz is plausible: In audio there's no abrupt drop-offs from 0 dB down to –75 dB or the like within 1 Hz, in reality the limits have the form of (irregular) roll-offs. So to get a passably linear response from 20 Hz to 20 kHz you have to use headphones with a frequency response of at least 12 Hz–30 kHz. Morever every drop-off causes phase and transient distortion, so it's better to avoid it.


----------



## RRod

tamal said:


> I was listening from my mobile & it doesn't have much volume.
> Also, I've previously mentioned that I could hear 19K at my usual listening volumep


 
  
 Yes, and hearing falls off quite quickly as you get up to 20k. As others have said, options are a) you have good hearing, b) the playback chain is causing distortion that is audible, though if you perceive the pitch at 20k as being higher than 18/19k, then that's probably not the problem. If you want to be sure the next thing to do is try it on a playback chain you can vouch for.


castleofargh said:


> could be some high IMD?


 
  
 Probably not if it's from a single tone.


----------



## TAMAL

The 20KHz playback was pretty linear & didn't sound like any distorted noise.


----------



## castleofargh

rrod said:


> tamal said:
> 
> 
> > I was listening from my mobile & it doesn't have much volume.
> ...


 

 well I didn't think from the 1khz, but from the HD from the 1khz. but I realize it would be that much further down in loudness, but why else would it be audible? unless of course our friend TAMAL is a lucky and young fellow.


----------



## TAMAL

castleofargh said:


> well I didn't think from the 1khz, but from the HD from the 1khz. but I realize it would be that much further down in loudness, but why else would it be audible? unless of course our friend TAMAL is a lucky and young fellow.




I'm 19. Is that the cause ?


----------



## RRod

tamal said:


> I'm 19. Is that the cause ?


 
  
 If you haven't ruined your ears, hearing at 20k is perfectly possible. Just keep that volume low if you want to keep it


----------



## TAMAL

Hey thanks, RRod . I try to keep it low when I'm listening to music...


----------



## Brent Pittman

I can hear to 70khz


----------



## VNandor

> I can hear to 70khz


 
 I hear all the frequencies that ever existed as well as all the frequencies that don't even exist.
  
 PS.: I find X-ray induced sounds to be extremely annoying.


----------



## gregorio

vnandor said:


> I hear all the frequencies that ever existed as well as all the frequencies that don't even exist.
> 
> PS.: I find X-ray induced sounds to be extremely annoying.


 
  
 It cost $620m to build LIGO? Silly rabbit, it could have cost just $1,000 (+ travel/accommodation expenses), I can hear gravitational waves!
  
 G


----------



## vinaychandel123

The general range of human hearing extends from about 20 Hz to 20 kHz, although this can vary depending upon the sensitivity of the individual ear and necessary frequency response or usual power output requirements well within the nominal spec for the product, thus minimizing distortion or other unwanted non-linearity.
for example, of a pair of headphones like the Sennheiser HD 800 that has frequency response of 8 Hz to 51 kHz


----------



## bigshot

Frequency response specs without a +/- dB after them don't mean a whole heck of a lot.


----------



## 71 dB

bigshot said:


> Frequency response specs without a +/- dB after them don't mean a whole heck of a lot.



You can't give the +/- dB value, because we live in a dumbing down culture. Too complex for most people. Technical specs have become marketing specs.


----------



## Speedskater

While with lab tone tests, many younger listeners can hear 20kHz tones and some much higher frequencies, in musical situations no one can hear anywhere near 20kHz. We should note that it's not easy to do a high frequency tone test. There are all kinds of distortion, cone breakup, noise and level problems in these tests.

Now when it comes to headphones, whatever they do above 20kHz, they need to do it gracefully.  Cone breakup and peaks in the frequency response are real problems.


----------

