Hearing loss and sampling frequency

[sq225917]

To the OP.

Are you running out of hard disc space?

[sburrell]

WAD62, Vincent Kars has posted what I was already aware of - there is a correlation. If I really wanted to save space and thought what you implied I did, I'd have asked if I could reduce to 16kHz, not 32!

It's not so much space on my Mac that's getting slim, but on my 160GB iPod Classic. Currently it holds exact ALAC copies of my main iTunes library, and I'd like to keep it that way.

Well, seeing as everyone is pretty clear that my idea was ill-informed, I'll forget the whole thing.

How does one go about getting a hearing test - just ask my GP for a referral?

[Ali Tait]

I guess so, but a normal hearing test won't cover the frequency extremes in any case AFAIK. Unless you feel you have a hearing problem I wouldn't worry about it.

[DaveK]

How does one go about getting a hearing test - just ask my GP for a referral?

Yes , that's exactly what I did and it happened very quickly. If you are found to have enough hearing loss to justify a hearing aid, please don't be afraid to ask for two (I'm talking NHS 'free' hearing aids here, if you go private the last remark might not be so appropriate as they aren't cheap ).
When I quietly asked if it would be possible to have two (industry related hearing loss in both ears), citing listening toi hi-fi as one of the reasons, the Audiologist said that they preferred and recommended fitting two because they work better in pairs, that is the net result of wearing two is better than the sum of the parts, if you follow me. Some people are reluctant to wear two because it doesn't do a lot for their 'street cred', but street cred isn't monitored in the privacy of your listening room .
And yes, they do make a big difference to the music you hear, well worth it for that alone, but I also noticed that the birds sang louder in my garden when I wore them
Cheers,
Dave.

[Reid Malenfant]

Street credibility in the listening room, love it My eyes might be getting a bit lazy (i'll soon need reading glasses i bet), but thankfully my ears are ok I can't read transistor codes on small signal ones any more, kind of freaky as I used to be able to easily

I kind of understand where you are coming from though Dave It's still kind of loud hear though & i'm a 45 year old git, we all age differently at the end of the day though

Only human

[DaveK]

...... i'm a 45 year old git, we all age differently at the end of the day though

Only human

Hi Mark,
And I was 26 when you were born tempus fugit, dunnit just .
Dave.

[dave2010]

It's not so much space on my Mac that's getting slim, but on my 160GB iPod Classic. Currently it holds exact ALAC copies of my main iTunes library, and I'd like to keep it that way.

Perhaps a bit tricky this, as we have an evolving situation. My guess is that originally the 160 Gbyte Classic was seen mostly as a portable device, and with 160 Gbytes it can store quite a lot of music, even in lossless formats - perhaps 3-500 CDs. When these gadgets were first developed people were more or less happy to use MP3 or similar codecs, sometimes at shockingly low bit rates. aac, which can be used on the iPods, is not a bad lossy codec, and for many people it's not unreasonable to use lossy compression in order to get more on. I reckon you should be able to get between 500-1000 CDs on with varying degrees of compression, and corresponding quality, or lack of it.

Now I've read of people using the iPod as a transport, perhaps using the Onkyo or Wadia docks, and while some claim that the iPod is no good as a high quality device (probably not - with the obvious outputs), others say it's good with a suitable digital dock. This suggests that it could even be used to store a large collection, but then of course the storage limitations become significant, if its purpose changes from a portable, convenience device, to something which can be used in a larger system.

One option is to shuffle files between your iMac and the iPod - "as needed", though this would lose some (possibly a lot of) convenience. So, if you wanted to listen to 1970s music one weekend you could transfer all those files over, and if next weekend you wanted opera, you could boot out the '70s stuff, and put the operas on. You may not like opera, but I'm sure you catch my drift. Presumably you'd really like to have access to all your files all the time, so this would only partially solve your problem. Another is to recode all your files to a lossy format at a suitable bit rate and then put those files on to your iPod. You'd obviously have to be careful not to lose the original ripped CD files.

Maybe, in the fullness of time, Apple or another provider, will issue something like an iPod with more storage. I wouldn't bet on Apple though, as they seem to be moving more towards networks and cloud storage, with perhaps the emphasis on convenience, and revenue for them and the network providers, rather than quality.