If only it were that simple. Each link in this chain adds up to more than a single component's issues.

Nice!

Thank you so much Maciej! I am very glad that you find these videos useful. Thank you again for your feedback!

well ngl the only analog things I have are my moogs synths and my behringer neutron analog synth no cap@@anadialog

Lars, that is so cool! Thank you!

Wow those are so expensive! Thereare 2 questions I have. All my components are almost all vintage and all the specs say 20hz-20khz +- but I know it doesn't mean it won't go higher but it still might be risky to get the tweeters no? Question 2 Would I have to put them in parallel or series with my 8 ohm tweeter?

Thank you so much!!

@@anadialog You are very welcome! :-)

Now that is a true compliment....I am flattered!

Thank YOU Max!

Wow! You want to implement that in a car! Fantastic! Well, ideally the crossover should be at 20khz or slightly above so there is no smearing, all the up to as much as you want, I'd say at least 40-50Khz.

True!

Hi Steve, thanks. Well, first of all I do not recommend the use of SuperTweeters if the sound of your system is on the bright side. If ut isn't, there are a few solutions but the one I know and have tested are those from Townshend Audio, which now have been enhanced reaching an extreme dynamic range. The good thing is that you can regulate with a knob the intensity of the presence or turn them off if desired...

Well, the only music with a cut off of the frequencies is a CD, but usually speakers reach maximum 20khz with linearity, so even those extra 2khz can benefit from the presence of supertweeters. I always felt just a more engaging experience with them on.

@anadialog I appreciate you getting back to me. I am using Amazon music with their Hi-Res Flac streams through a Wiim Pro Plus streamer. So I would hope that It's putting out a higher frequency spectrum than the standard CD. In this case a super tweeter may be of benefit? Speakers are Wharfedale Linton 85th, so start rolling off around the 15khz mark with soft dome tweeters.

Hi, I wish such speaker and signal existed....the answer unfortunately is no, you will always distinguish real sound from playback.. you could perhaps be uncertain for a few kind of instruments, like a guitar but after a while you would understand if its live or recorded...sad but true...

@@anadialog Thank you for your response. I am working on building a robot and I wish this robot talks without people recognizing that this audio is coming from a speaker. So where do you think the problem lies when it comes to reproducing realistic audio which people can't differentiate if its real or reproduced? why do you think we are able to recognize the difference between real person talking vs a recorded audio clip of a person talking? (Even though its hi-res audio).

Wow, very interesting! Uuuh! Mid range frequencies as voice are the most difficult to reproduce and fool someone's ear...well, I would say that we have technological limitations. In my opinion only when we will reach biological technology it will be possible to reproduce true realistic sound...check this video I made for morel details. The main topic may help you: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jtl6jdGLm5uzeqs.html

De nada!

Frequencies above 20khz can still have a physiological response on humans even if you can't consciously perceive them. Studies by Neve and some Japanese companies in the 70s did some research showing that people favoured the music with frequency information over 40khz, but that was only when exposed via speakers, and did not work with headphones, thus is must be stimulating some other sort of biological systems/organs, perhaps one of the nervous systems.

You are indeed correct. Actually, a DSP would be an optimal solution to really make sure the crossing is optimized, but I must also admit that when I had those speakers, some time has passed now from that video, the supertweeter gave that extra air to the scene that is was worthwhile the downsides it carried.

Nice! Thanks for telling us!

It very strange. Behind the tweeters, I forgot to say, there is a knob to increase or dimish the effect. You imnediately feel mire space around the instruments and just overall the mysic sounds more natural. I must admit that if you have a 'bright' system, maybe this is not the right choice. In fact, I just changed my amplifier, which has a strong presence in the upper frequencies and in the end I had to turn them off!!

Hi Krikkor, thanks for your comment. It took 20 years to make my system this way. It was a very long and fun voyage. And it is still in the process of tweaking and making things better, it's the audiophile itch. In any case, when 20 years ago, or more actually, I started with a normal Sony stereo to me it was the best sound in the world. No need to go high end, it is something thatbyiubslowly discover as for whiskey, wine, etc. What you have is perfect, every once in a while you make a new little footstep and you discover that your sound improved, at that point you are happy...and so on. At each stage, you feel happy and not that you are always missing something, perhaps that will kick in after. I know you are a man of experience but I wanted to write this also for the newbies that are reading the comments.

@@anadialog Dear Aldo. Thank you for your response.

No worries, speakers themselves tend to have impedance fluctuations. Connect the tweeters to the speaker inputs and test if you like the sound...they not always blend in...

Well, I think that jazz and classical music are more revealing. But with a good system, and especially with high-res music, you should here that extra opening 'space.

If you haven't, check out this other video I made were I bring some evidence to my claims! Well, I only experienced the Townshend SuperTweeters so I wouldn't feel comfortable suggesting other brands even though I am sure you can spend less and get the same quality. Sorry!

@@anadialog Yes , those S tweeters are more expensive than used BMW :) .But here i found a problem. The crossover of mi floor standing speakers killing the high frequency . Signal 40 000 Hz from generator send to the crossovers just disappear in the outlet of the original super tweeter , and the measurements on the input in parallel , where should connect the external super tweeter shows very low level of the sent signal 40 000 Hz. In the diagram for the crossovers I see that they are using transformers to filtering the crossovers. Unbelievable. I think that this transformers shorted the high frequencies and lowering the level of them The transformers just eating the high frequencies and sucking them from the amplifier .I have to redesign the crossovers and to eliminate the transformers, the ferite pins into the coils , electrolytic capacitors and to make coils with more thick wires . Do you have some video concerning the quality and efficiency of the crossovers?

Interesting! The frequency crossover is a delicate aspect and a DSP, as many say, does help this issue. No, unfortunately I don't have a dedicated video!

@@anadialog What is DSP? Digital Signal Processor? Electronic crossover?

@@antonjoe5611 yes, a Digital Signal Processor. It regulates with precision the crossover. It's an active solution, and digital. So you do have a conversion there. In dome cases, like my new speakers, the dsp is just for a specific portion of the spectrum, in my case the subwoofer.

Hey bro, just curious did you end up getting a set and how did it turn out?

I will do something more in depth in the future but you should check out also this video: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sLWAd5qdsNepgGQ.html And this for matching issues: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ippia9B62t2deYU.html

I'll sell you my tube box ds with upgraded powersupply

Interesting, thank you!

Yup!!

I have the same frequency range on my monoblocks 10-60.....but the problem is that my preamp is rated @ 20hz-20khz. Therefore, I guess no supertweeters for me😒

No! Thanks for telling us!

ana[dia]log yeah he’s always pushing for the best sound possible, it’s a real shame he’s gone

True! I have a few albume and they sound Amazing...he Aldo war one of the first to publish a New album in blu ray pure audio...

I am sure it will, although, I never tried these. The only problem I see is the Ortofon which isn't going above 20khz but there is always time to upgrade!

@@anadialog eh eh, that's right... Grazie

Very interesting! I think that this trick does positively influence our perception...

I also observed something very interesting in terms of "Psycho Accoustics" In EVERY Modern Recordings of Chart music like Ariana Grande or such you can find a constant, very fine and high frequency hiss ALWAYS laid over the voice. It sounds pleasing and makes the voice sounds smooother and softer. But it is not natural. I discovered that on my own, i am a pretty analytic listener. Its definitely not natural, i highly doubt it is unwanted hiss from the recording. My conclusion it is a wanted hiss to smoothen the voice to let it sound finer so listeners are more pleased. If i had the possibility i would try it myself.

Interesting!

Sompli many times the hiss sound you describe over vocals may be a combination of the microphones used and odd sounds created by the nature and use of digital sampling and mixing. 24-bit mixing is not as bad as 16-bit mixing was, but there are very noticeable audio artifacts created when digitally mixing many tracks together.

@@denshi-oji494 but when i recorded sound or instruments i never had it. I also had managed meetings with digital adressable microphones and hundreds of them . I worked with expensive mixers and really good sennheiser and sure microphones. I never ever had such a phenomenon. I wont believe that such studios, who should have way better equipment, have such a problem. But anyways. No matter how it is created. It is definitely used / not filtered out on purpose. As this brain pleasing background pink hiss.

Ciao Tony! This should help: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNqeaJpjv6-naJ8.html

Thank you Ren!

@@anadialog you are welcome!, merry sound xmas.

If you don't have at least one part of your gear that can go beyond the higher frequency range of your loudspeakers, usually 20-22Khz, then yes, it is useless. Receivers almost always go way beyond 20Khz...so the rest is easy to upgrade.

These are the specifications to my receiver = 100wattsminimumcontinuouspowerperchannel ,8 ohm loads, 2 channels driven from 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a maximum total harmonic distortion of 0.08 % (FTC rating) • WRAT-Wide Range Amplifier Technology (5 Hz-100 kHz bandwidth)? Not sure what this means? • Optimum Gain Volume Circuitry I’m unsure if the super tweeters are worth getting, Could you please check, and let me know if my receivers frequency range is 20 Hz to 20 kHz or is it 5 Hz to 100 kHz? Many thanks again.

I will try! Can you give me brand and model of your amplifier?

ana[dia] The receiver is a Onkyo TX-SR 705 = 100 Watts minimum per channel at ohm loads, 2 channels driven from 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a maximum total harmonic distortion of 0.08 % (FTC rating) • WRAT-Wide Range Amplifier Technology (5 Hz-100 kHz bandwidth) • Optimum Gain Volume Circuitry. Thank you kindly for taking the time!

I have been looking around and I must say that you are right, it is confusing. I am afraid that apart from the artificial and ambiguous WRAT, the true frequency response of your Onkyo is 20Hz-20Khz, also considering the fact that it is a Home Cinema device and not created especially for high quality audio. If you want to be 100% you need to contact Onkyo and ask the TRUE frequency range of the machine. Keep us updated!

Interesting, I will experiment but the manufacturer does not recommend that. Plus, the Townshend SuoerTweeters have an intensity knob behind that can, perhaps, emulate that effect.

Hi Darius! Thank you for your questions. First of all, I would like to say that FLAC, although uses a lossless type of codec, is always a compressed file. Errors may occur in all digital files as distortion in analog media. Apart from that, FLAC may very well have a very high frequency response IF the original analog music signal was converted with a high sampling frequency (i.e. 96Khz, 192Khz, 320Khz etc.) and also have a high dynamic range if it has a high bit depth (i.e. 24bit, 32bit etc.). If these parameters are respected the FLAC file will have a high frequency range. Nevertheless, the FLAC codec does have limitations, in fact the highest frequency that it can reach is 65Khz and a maximum depth of 24bit. No, there are no instruments that go beyond, I would say 10-12Khz, simply because there is no sense in creating musical instruments with just very high frequencies, hard to do and unpleasant to hear! Yes, electronic synthesizer can reproduce very high frequency, it is purely artificial/electronic. Here is a good scheme of frequencies: www.offbeat.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/eq-chart.pdf In any case, that is not the point! The point is that harmonics, sound pressure, reverberation, ambience etc. create high frequencies in nature and COMBINED with lower/normal frequencies result in a TRUE, natural and dynamic sound, as in real life. Without those frequencies the result is purely artificial, flat, and listening fatigue is behind the corner as well is unsatisfaction!

I have strong doubts about "The point is that harmonics, sound pressure, reverberation, ambience etc. create high frequencies in nature and COMBINED with lower/normal frequencies result in a TRUE, natural and dynamic sound, as in real life.". Can you please give me some links that would confirm this information? Thank you in advance.

My doubts are based on education.lenardaudio.com/en/03_db.html .

Hi Darius, thank you for your comment. I base my videos on personal experience, courses and interaction with professionals in the field besides...pure hi-fi passion. Nevertheless, this is not my field of research so unfortunately I cannot suggest a bibliography in this sense. Yes, I can post some links but they have, more ore less, the same reliability as my videos! Including the link you have posted here below. We need a peer reviewed article! Actually I don't understand your doubts. In compress music, harmonics, mainly high frequency harmonics, are cut off. Check these links for example: www.teachmeaudio.com/recording/sound-reproduction/fundamental-harmonic-frequencies/ www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4737978/ passionforsound.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/understanding-mp3s-and-other-compressed-music/ These harmonics include reverberation and ambience, hence a change in the sound pressure in your ear, which is not only a matter of dynamics but also a subtle physical effect on your eardrums. If all this is absent in compress music, as all digital and analog recorded music is (since it is an encoding and not a faithful reproduction), then we are missing an important part of the sound spectrum and the overall experiences is increasingly far from a live music experience (concerts, opera etc.). Besides harmonics, as I have explained in the video, all other high and low frequencies that are usually part of the spectrum are cut off in order to handle more easily the file and create a more easy listening (as explained in the ncbi link) besides greatly reducing the weight of music files. This is dramatically true, especially in heavy compressing as in Mp3 codecs etc.

Darius Avižinis Lossless files like FLAC simply take patterns in the digital and tell the computer how many times to reproduce that patter. A 44.1K 16 bit FLAC file will be unfolded to standard PCM data when it is sent to your DAC. Nyquist theorem states that you need to double the sampling rate of the highest frequency you plan on reproducing. 44.1K will go as high as 22,050 Hz. 96K will go to 48,000 Hz. 192K will go to 96,000 Hz and so on.

Thank you!

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNqeaJpjv6-naJ8.html

@@anadialog I can't believe it, but in that video you mentioned a paper written by Jorge Petrosino and Cannalis. Actually, Jorge Petrosino is my uncle and we are from Argentina. jajaja. Interesting coincidence.

Interesting!

Really!! Nobody yet, but I will take that as a big compliment!

ana[dia]log might be your cold too a bit, but when i had the video playing in the background, I heard a lot of similarities, and yeah, A ... rEEl big cOM pliment... ;)

I show a picture in the video...the standard is directly in your loudspeakers with a piggyback solution: images.app.goo.gl/VEFj5yYxTJFsLcar6

...but you can also strip them and connected directly or with any type of connectors to your speakers...here are all the details: www.townshendaudio.com/supertweeters/

Indeed! I discussed this in several videos . This was one of the first ones plus we were talking about compression so as a side note I mentioned this. Surely it is not the primary reason, I agree.

Not clearer, but more faithful. This happens though if you have a high resolution chain: source and amp!

Depends on the speakers you have. I'd say if you have really good speakers which are engineered properly, no, it'll not sound better. If you have low quality cheap speakers - no, pretty sure it'll not sound better. The best way is to try it and if you think it's worth it then buy it. Properly made speakers don't need any additional tweeters. Adding more speakers will insert timing, balancing issues and "coloring".

To be sure you must seek professional advice

@@anadialog hehe, i live in such country where listening to one ear is still not problem. Forget frequency band ... Even doc will question why you want to hear beyond 10k frequency 🌝

What do you mean they don't work? Your not expecting normal sound from them, right? When on, you should perceive music in a different way, more spacious and with better transients...in other words more natural. Perhaps you do not hear any difference and that is why you think they don't work. Use a track you know well, possibly of high resolution music or analog. Set the tweeters to the maximum (if they have a knob behind) and they listen again to that same track with the supertwitters detached from the loudspeakers...any difference?

Checking online I see that your receiver has a very limited frequency response (20hz-20khz) meaning that it isn't amplifying the higher frequencies that the supertweeter are supposed to reproduce. I think we found our bottleneck...

@@anadialog Yes. You found the bottleneck. Damn. Now I must send them back. Thanks for your useful help.

I had a visit from the Audio Gods yesterday. "Boy, don't try to tweak your system anymore. Just be glad of what you have, and enjoy the music." I haven't got the best set-up around, but with my limited budget, it's not the worst. I've got all the gear. A record washer, an AudioQuest anti-static brush, a gel stylus cleaner, a mono cartridge, a record stabilizer, a protractor and a leather turntable mat. What more could I need? But, "The Perfect Sound." Oh, well... Have a good week my friend.

😆😆😆

Why not! Actually, most high-res headphones already have that!

I do agree that a DSP is required for precise crossover and timing

Perhaps you missed this video where I go in depth in the topic. One thing I did not remark enough in the video is that frequencies below 20Hz and above 20Khz, influence the audible spectrum, hence you don't have to be a bat but if we have the whole spectrum the frequencies we can actually hear will sound more realistic, during recording and playback: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNqeaJpjv6-naJ8.html

@@anadialog mmmm I checked it out...looks promising, but I would love to have a 1st hand experience on how I feel, lets be honest we don't have proper music XD

Thank you!

We don't hear above 20 KHz directly, but we do hear how these frequencies interact with audible frequencies. Even though I cannot hear any tones above 4 K, I still know when the treble or distorted or missing because it affects the midrange.

You don't hear it you can only feel it stop saying hear everybody it's impossible to a test I can only hear till about 16khz. Do test tones on your system you will see you ain't gonna hear anything

Wow, Superman, I found you!

I agree...in fact I have both....covering the whole spectrum!

You can! It depends from what type of music you are listening and also what is foe you a good pair of headphones...plus the source itself is important...the best results are obtainable, IMHO, with loudspeakers. That is where you here space between instruments and the effect of the ambience. That is the first thing that goes away with compression besides onviously the dynamics....

@@anadialog Is my Sennheiser HD 558 too bad to make the difference hearable? But I also dont hear any difference on any other headphone or speakers. No matter what kind of music i tried or if i use an eq it sounds always the same. :/

Sennheiser is a great brand. I will to do a test in the future comparing different types of compression and resolution. In any case, lucky you if you do not hear a difference. That means that all music is good (or bad) to you!

Mainstream songs have quite a shit dynamic range and the mix and mastering is kinda flat, so it's hard to pick up differences

Try to find some songs that were recorded and handled with more care if you aren't using them to test already

Interesting...

Used market is the first place to look! You never know!

@@anadialog That's true, but still, even at half the price, they are out of my budget. I ordered a pair of super tweeters more in my price range, looking for "the perfect sound." I'll never find it, but the journey is more important than the destination. Have a good Sunday.

Indeed!

No, of course, that is bit depth. My point was that the frequency response of compressed files like Mp3, even with a high bitrate, is greatly reduced. Hence, the faithfulness of of music is dramatically decreased...

I do agree that a DSP would help! In any case I am not using them anymore but when I did I must sdmit that they made my ATC loudspeakers sing!

@@anadialog My comment above has nothing to do with DSP but with speaker design basics, which, you obviously know nothing about. Before you go suggesting and praise add-on "SuperTweeters" do a little research of how multiway speaker crossovers works, it's far more complicated than you think.

Humm, DSP takes care of most of those issues maybe you should start reading a little more my friend and try to propose yourself in a more humble and constructive way instead of printing your finger from a pedestal. But apart from all this, my ears told me that WITH the supertweeters installed my ATC loudspeakers sounded much more realistic and THAT is important, not specs, not your opinion. We have to start trusting more our senses in fact I am sure that you are a technician of some kind that in most cases are only able to discuss with numbers but as we know, numbers mueasure quantity not quality. Quality may be inferred but that is a second passage. Both are important!

@@anadialog That was almost funny, almost... While with DSP you can more easily take care of driver integration Phase related issues (with Brickwall FIR Filters and/or Delay lines) than with Passive (or Active Analog) crossovers there's not "one size fits all" solution, as is the case with add-ons Supertweeters. You're are essentially adding another "way" on your speakers turning them from 3way to 4way and to do that PROPERLY you need measurements, not what your "senses" tell you... You think that the ATC guys used their "senses" when designed these awesome speakers or a set exhaustive measurements to properly integrate the three drivers together and get an overall smooth and Linear Frequency Response? Your "senses" can only tell you that much and be sure they can't tell if you ruined the response of that ATC Tweeter by creating a huge dip in their response followed by a huge peak from that SuperTweeter.

True, good point. Perhaps in a new video I could go over that. Thanks!

@@anadialog Very fine. I am looking forward, and wish a good health.

I don't understand if this is for real...ok I ma not a technician, as always claimed, or an audio engineer. I have some competence and followed a few courses, in any case this is my passion and I like to share my points of view with others. As I always say, if you are looking for law, then you should head to academia.edu, surely not KZfaq, and read peer review articles...QUOTE: "Do you even know what a peer reviewed article is?" Just to cite your wrong attitude towards people instead of discussing peacefully. In any case, if you start off saying that I don't understand the difference between dynamic compression and data compression then you are not reliable in your comment. It is just a sterile attack. You are following the book, but you clearly don't know what is really happening Think out of the box sometimes.. Yes, digital formats MAY have a superior dynamic range, I said that in the video, especially the high res formats, but VERY RARELY this is used! In the vast majority of CD and other digital media issues and reissues the dynamic range is compressed in order to achieve a louder output (loudness war) and reduce the difference between high and low peaks that may 'disturb' people of create problems in low quality equipment (these are the reasons since the beginning of digital productions as well as also in analog, like happened for example for the first Led Zeppelin album that was took out of the market because the lower frequencies, which were uncompressed, or very little compressed, were making the stylus jump out of the grooves when used poor quality equipment). Most vinyl productions, even when sourced from high res digital as today, have a higher dynamic range as well as a better frequency response because of the intrinsic 20khz cut-off of red book cd format. A SACD, blu-ray audio or HD track will be equal or better IF they are true high res and not just an upsampling. You suggested a home made experiment that clearly does NOT match reality, what the industry is feeding us. Yes, of course if I create my own Mp3 starting from a high res file I am going to have great dynamic range, which of course is not tied to the data compression, which takes advantage of the high frequencies cut-off. Another common pitfall is that of describing analog formats with digital parameters, that just doesn't work. It is a good starting point to explain yourself but it is not scientific, reality is different. Bit depth in vinyl? Not bits, the whole signal is there. Digital resolution is not applicable to analog resolution. One is numbers one is noise. Just take a deep look and check other points of view. The digital Bible law is way too self-referential. We are forgetting how analog works and how good it can be and how dangerous digital is when using it badly like today. Audiophile digital productions are something out of the picture and those ARE truly high quality and in several cases superior to analog (in terms of fidelity, I do not care about the rest). I have no problem in admitting that. The problem is that what is on paper does not match what reaches our ears.

Are you sure that you're not just upset that you discovered that super tweeters CAN actually make a difference and you went into a long diatribe about everything else? Lol. Some audiophiles are stuck on the old stigma of super tweeters from the 70s. It's the same thing with people that don't keep up with technology. A good analogy are people that say "Hyundai cars are crap" - they are repeating an old stereotype from 1986. When in reality, today there are some of the best constructed vehicles with some of the highest initial quality including tons of features. Stereotypes and stigmas will keep you in the stone age. As for the other topics, that's between you guys.

Amen

​@@CeeStyleDj I'll just say that I refuse to call myself "an audiophile", because despite believing that listening is the ultimate experience, I like to understand the science behind sound recording and reproduction, and not the snake oil and/or bias introduced by our very complex brains (in the way they process what our ears actually hear, how they integrate (and discard) sounds in the time domain, etc. Integrating super-tweeters in a already existing/finished loudspeaker without actually measuring what the whole "system" is 99% guaranteed to introduce holes and peaks in the frequency response in the point where they are playing along with the tweeters, unless you measure it with good quality (and calibrated) equipment in order to make sure that you have not only the right crossover points (which may need changing the crossover in the original loudspeaker and the supertweeter itseld), but also making sure that they're both phase-aligned. Then you must take into account that even 10.000 Hz is a highly directional frequency, let alone frequencies well above 20.000 Hz. This is all about science, and if it wasn't for science we would still be only listening to live instrumental or vocal music, since there would be no sound recording to start with. This isn't something that an audiophile from decades ago would say (and even most of today). I've explained a very small part of the science behind sound reproduction which are facts. That being said, I firmly believe that every person should use its own system the way they most appreciate it, disregarding whatever opinion any other people might have. ;-) I'm not such a believer in the value of providing disinformation, and that was the base of my original comment. BTW, as a car lover, I also agree with you on the ever growing quality of Hyundai/Kia cars, which was only possible by applying science, technology and loads of money on research. No one can develop a good car based on belief or anecdotal evidence. ;-) Cheers

​@@anadialog Ignorance is acceptable (Like your video clearly demonstrates), but it's still not a bliss. Amen is precisely the tribal thing any engineer would never say while trying to build anything, or we would still rubbing pieces of wood in order to light a fire. lol I'll reiterate (one more time) that as long as you like the result of your super tweeters, that's the most important thing for you (or anyone else that feels the same about any changes to a well-engineered loudspeaker like yours). But trying to fight science without taking the basic steps into understanding why you are hearing the changes that you are hearing (and I'm not saying that they aren't real) is magnifying unnecessarily your own lack of knowledge. You don't need to spend a lot of money on equipment that allows you to measure (in a meaningful way) what your super-tweeters are doing, and that could still provide a good technical reason for integrating them in your system. It's obvious that you don't need to do it (at all) as long as you're only trying to convince yourself, but you just can't amen the B.S. out of science. I also say amen to many things, and I do have my religious faith on a higher power. But that's faith and I don't ask/pray to any superior entity to build me a great amplifier or set of loudspeakers, or even to remap the ECU of my car. And I wouldn't ask a medical doctor to do any of those things either, because that's not their expertise or what they spent years/decades studying and practicing (with some very likely rare exceptions). We're all ignorant on many more subjects than we are knowledge about, so I don't mean any offense to you while stating that you're showing ignorance on this super-tweeter argument. I'm just saying that you can learn about it if you want, and there are a lot of free valuable resources (like presentations, books and studies from Dr. Floyd Toole, amongst many others who explain several aspects of loudspeaker design an testing). I personally love testing (listening) to several loudspeakers and measuring them when I can, and I believe that as an audio focused person you might also like to try it (I may be worng, of course). So please don't take my humble suggestion the wrong way, because I believe that all of us who enjoy this hobby like we do should share knowledge instead of contributing to the steady decline of the HiFi community by speading snake oil and disinformation. Cheers and stay safe in this crazy times the we live in. 👍

....and though it sounds amazing when it is on!

@@anadialog I don't think this is an answer, Sorry. I agree with Holger Schnarre on this specific topic. Any improvement in the frequency range delivered by your super tweeters cannot be heard by your ears unless you have the super hearing of a bat. We are talking about ultrasounds here! I think it is more scientific to say that you are hearing the sound of 4 tweeters playing together frequencies up to 20.000Hz (if your hearing is still 100%) and that gives you the illusion that you are hearing an improvement in "frequency extension" while in reality it is just "high frequency loudness".

You are mistaken and I have proven elsewise here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNqeaJpjv6-naJ8.html

Holger Schnarre you are operating under the assumption that the human ear is all we use to “ hear” when in fact humans can actually feel sound throughout our entire body. Hearing music and feeling music go hand in hand. Listening to music off your iPhone through a pair of earbuds is not going to give you the same experience as listening to music at home through a good system with great speakers that are able to reproduce the full sound spectrum of the music being played.

You are talking about comb filtering. They make advanced all-in-one super tweeters these days with built-in crossover knobs - just watch some tests on KZfaq. No one is complaining about comb filtering except for people in the comments that don't own them lol.

Okan, I made a video that proofs that what lies beyond 20khz has indeed and effect on humans and makes music more real: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNqeaJpjv6-naJ8.html

You are a baffoon

Thank you Rick but maybe you didn't catch tha main point of the vid.. there is a number if factors including a different pressure in your ear drums that are generated at higher freqencies and that do influence the listener. Harmonics and reverb among all, which also take place above the famous 20Khz threshold.

"I call BS on needing anything that produces sound above 20kHz." Bare my english, but I think left and right channel frequencies interacting with each other ( 6:28 ) could create harmonics that are on hearable area. My CURRENT knowledge can't agree with other reasons in his list. Obviously said interactions can't happen with headphones.

Obviously we are talking of harmonics during recording and the presence of higher frequencies (if used proper mics) during playback

"Obviously we are talking of harmonics during recording..." Well, I misunderstood that part. What I'm talking about, is possibility of indirect but meaningful effect of non-hearable information precisely while listening. That's what I'm interested as a listener - surprisingly. I raised this question in the past towards people who were mocking HI-RES sources. Nobody answered at that time. Let's say there is 26kHz sound and 29kHz sound which we can NOT hear. But if these frequencies interact and create tones in lower frequency area, we can hear them, even if those tones are secondary information of original tones (expressions of their 'relationship'). I think I have no reason to assume, that they could not be more or less similar in nature than real tones in live setting for example. If that's the case, they bring richness to music. Also we have to remember that there can be A LOT of those interacting tones in music pieces.

Yes, i agree..but also high frequencies (and very low) are created which have also a physical pressure on our ear. The ensamble of all these effects, msybe cannot be all heard but do have an effect on the listener and it is this part that is constantly missing in most recordings, lacking for this reason, fidelity and emotion.

As I said in various videos it is not only a matrer of audibility, the upper frequencies, as the very low frequencies, have a phisucal inpact and change the rest of the ither frequencies. It is the full soectrum that sounds REAL because in real life, all sounds have always the entire spectrum. Psychoacoustics is a science not an opinion.

@@anadialog Yes (or maybe not). Psichacoustics is a Sience with very diffuse boundaries and no less diffuse results. A bit flawed for taking it as a conclusive knowledge source. Please, don't dismiss the analogy I've used relating sight.

I don't! We see correctly also because of the presence of other non visible (to us) radiations...

@@anadialog How can you be sure of your statement? Any conclusive experiment?

There are a few, hard to find though. Here are some good examples. Need to read a little bit to get to the point: www.teachmeaudio.com/recording/sound-reproduction/fundamental-harmonic-frequencies/ www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4737978/ passionforsound.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/understanding-mp3s-and-other-compressed-music/

Ok, we are waiting to know why from you.

@version7121 Two words. Check this: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNqeaJpjv6-naJ8.html