# Rated Hz Response



## icor1031 (Mar 24, 2011)

Both of these tweets have a very similar SPL to 40 kHz. 
Why is one rated to only 20kHz frequency response, then?

Thanks.

http://www.parts-express.com/pdf/264-900s.pdf
http://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/specs/264-908-tang-band-25-1983-specifications.pdf


----------



## robbo266317 (Sep 22, 2008)

From the graphs neither are impressive above 20 kHz. However that should not be an issue for most home theatre set-ups.
The most noticeable difference is the low end response. Both get down to around 600 Hz. Again this should not be a problem as most systems would cross them over higher than that to minimise distortion.

I would look for reviews of each to determine which is the better device.


----------



## icor1031 (Mar 24, 2011)

As for the low end, I am thinking about crossing @ 1250 with a woofer.

I do not play my audio loud.
Can I lower the total output from the bottom up to 20k, so it has a good response to 30-40?

Or is there a different issue?


----------



## robbo266317 (Sep 22, 2008)

icor1301 said:


> As for the low end, I am thinking about crossing @ 1250 with a woofer.
> 
> I do not play my audio loud.
> Can I lower the total output from the bottom up to 20k, so it has a good response to 30-40?
> ...


Unless you are using a very high quality source for input, and your ears are in perfect condition, then there is no benefit in extending the range past 20kHz to 40kHz. The only documented reason to have this extended response, that I have found, is because massed violins have overtones in that area which interfere with each other to produce sounds in the sub 20kHz band.


----------



## icor1031 (Mar 24, 2011)

Robbo,

I found this bit of information,
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=229728


HOWEVER..

You said very high quality input.
I will be watching movies and playing country music over HDMI.
Would this qualify?
If not, I'll stick to 20k and the cheaper driver.


----------



## vettett15 (Jul 1, 2009)

I wonder if anyone has done any testing to see if people can tell the difference. If you ran a speaker that has good response out beyond 20khz and then put a low pass filter in that cuts everything about 20khz off and see if it sounds different. I'd have to imagine the differences would be very small if any.


----------



## icor1031 (Mar 24, 2011)

They did this in my link above.



vettett15 said:


> I wonder if anyone has done any testing to see if people can tell the difference. If you ran a speaker that has good response out beyond 20khz and then put a low pass filter in that cuts everything about 20khz off and see if it sounds different. I'd have to imagine the differences would be very small if any.


----------



## Oktyabr (Jan 31, 2012)

Stick to 20Hz-20kHz, the golden "Full Range". CDs can carry a signal up to 21kHz (half their 44.1kHz sampling rate) and most good players roll off long before then. Bluray players can attain 98kHz (half of 192kHz sampling) or 48kHz from 98kHz sample rate recordings... but NONE of these formats use anything much above the 20/20 range mentioned for CD above. Why? Because tonal balance will be wrong if anything but pure equal amplification of all audio frequencies are used... basically it sounds worse. In a nutshell 20Hz-20kHz is the majority of the range of human hearing... if your ears are in exceptional good health. Most peoples are not. I have a dip above 18kHz myself... loss of hearing comes with age, from the high end on down. 

No one commercially produces music or sound track for movies much above this range because 1) most people don't have gear... from the player to the speakers... capable of fully reproducing much beyond 20kHz and 2) even if they did most people wouldn't be able to tell a difference anyway.

Just my opinion.


----------



## icor1031 (Mar 24, 2011)

Very informative. Thanks.



Oktyabr said:


> Stick to 20Hz-20kHz, the golden "Full Range". CDs can carry a signal up to 21kHz (half their 44.1kHz sampling rate) and most good players roll off long before then. Bluray players can attain 98kHz (half of 192kHz sampling) or 48kHz from 98kHz sample rate recordings... but NONE of these formats use anything much above the 20/20 range mentioned for CD above. Why? Because tonal balance will be wrong if anything but pure equal amplification of all audio frequencies are used... basically it sounds worse. In a nutshell 20Hz-20kHz is the majority of the range of human hearing... if your ears are in exceptional good health. Most peoples are not. I have a dip above 18kHz myself... loss of hearing comes with age, from the high end on down.
> 
> No one commercially produces music or sound track for movies much above this range because 1) most people don't have gear... from the player to the speakers... capable of fully reproducing much beyond 20kHz and 2) even if they did most people wouldn't be able to tell a difference anyway.
> 
> Just my opinion.


----------

