# Does music sound unnatural through headphones?



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

I always listen to music through my speakers. Listening through headphones sounds odd and strange to me - like there's too much spread and disconnection between the instruments. I was was wondering why this is so? Dynamics and equalisation are different too. 

Obviously, the sound coming from the left can only enters the left ear and the sound coming from the right can only enters the right ear. This doesn't occur when listening in a room through speakers - one gets a blend of the speakers in each ear.

Does this explain the unnaturalness I experience or do headphone makers feed some of the sound of the left can into the right can and vice versa?

I've noticed that a lot of listeners enjoy music through headphones so I am perhaps somewhat alone on this.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

I have no idea what you mean. I think headphones are a very direct, pure and intimate way to listen to music.
On headphones sounds can be heard in a range from 100% left and 0% right, to 0% left and 100% right and everything in between. It makes no sense to "feed" the sound of one side to the other.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

You will not be getting reflected sound from surfaces in your listening room when using headphones which will account for some of the difference in the sound you hear. 
It will also depend if you are using open backed or closed headphones - the difference between headphones and speakers when using open backed are in my experience lessened.
Some detail can be better heard on headphones as there is no absorption of sound frequencies that inevitably occur with speakers in a domestic environment.
FWIW - I too prefer listening to speakers but consideration of others in the home means headphones can be required.

I am sure some others will be able to give a more technical appraisal of the differences but that is my limited understanding of the difference.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

DeepR said:


> I have no idea what you mean. I think headphones are a very direct, pure and intimate way to listen to music.
> On headphones sounds can be heard in a range from 100% left and 0% right, to 0% left and 100% right and everything in between. It makes no sense to "feed" the sound of one side to the other.


100% of the sound coming from the left can of a pair of headphones enters the left ear. 0% of it enters the right ear. Vice versa regarding the right can. That isn't the case when listening through speakers.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Malx said:


> You will not be getting reflected sound from surfaces in your listening room when using headphones which will account for some of the difference in the sound you hear.
> It will also depend if you are using open backed or closed headphones - the difference between headphones and speakers when using open backed are in my experience lessened.
> Some detail can be better heard on headphones as there is no absorption of sound frequencies that inevitably occur with speakers in a domestic environment.
> FWIW - I too prefer listening to speakers but consideration of others in the home means headphones can be required.
> ...


Certainly room acoustics can be an issue, through fortunately not in my case. It can depend where the speakers are placed in the room. Finding a sweet spot is worth experimenting with.

I didn't know that about open backed headphones. Mine are closed.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

janxharris said:


> 100% of the sound coming from the left can of a pair of headphones enters the left ear. 0% of it enters the right ear. Vice versa regarding the right can. That isn't the case when listening through speakers.


Yes, but isn't the important thing how much sound from stage left versus stage right in the recorded world goes into each ear? That depends on the mixing, right?


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Music is meant to be heard in space, not confinement. The reason certain concert halls, such as the Concertgebouw, have differing characteristics is because they do something to the sound.

If you know this recording -- https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...&sr=1-4-fkmr0&keywords=bruckner+8+wand+lubeck -- you can hear what the hall does to the sound.

It seems to me the digital generation, often listening to a phone through ear buds, cares less about sound than perhaps the stereo generation who spent lavishly on equipment. Today's super audio recordings are often better than reality, on the other hand.

One certainly about earphones and ear buds is, if you use them relentlessly for years, you will have tinnitus in your 40s or 50s.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> Yes, but isn't the important thing how much sound from stage left versus stage right in the recorded world goes into each ear? That depends on the mixing, right?


That is right - but listening through speakers will reduce the stereo spread compared to headphones wont it? An oboe that is somewhat left in the stereo field will have most sound coming from the left speaker/can and only some from the right speaker/can. The right ear will still pick up some of the sound coming from the left _speaker_, but not the left _can_.

That's how it looks to me anyway. I'm not an expert.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

janxharris said:


> 100% of the sound coming from the left can of a pair of headphones enters the left ear. 0% of it enters the right ear. Vice versa regarding the right can. That isn't the case when listening through speakers.


My DAC/headphone amp has a crossfeed switch which allows each channel to "bleed" slightly into the other (with a slight delay).


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

jegreenwood said:


> My DAC/headphone amp has a crossfeed switch which allows each channel to "bleed" slightly into the other (with a slight delay).


Curious. What effect does this switch have on your listening experience would you say?


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

janxharris said:


> I always listen to music through my speakers. Listening through headphones sounds odd and strange to me - like there's too much spread and disconnection between the instruments. I was was wondering why this is so? Dynamics and equalisation are different too.
> 
> Obviously, the sound coming from the left can only enters the left ear and the sound coming from the right can only enters the right ear. This doesn't occur when listening in a room through speakers - one gets a blend of the speakers in each ear.
> 
> ...


 I totally concur with the OP. I use headphones when I travel, and occasionally at home when I am trying to be quiet and not disturb others. I have several types of phones and have used a couple of headphone amps. I am not saying that it isn't an enjoyable experience, but I definitely prefer speakers. There is something unnatural about having music pumped into your ears, and there is that hole-in-the-stage phenomenon. After an hour I also get uncomfortable, both with headphones and in ear buds.


----------



## Joe B (Aug 10, 2017)

janxharris said:


> I always listen to music through my speakers. Listening through headphones sounds odd and strange to me - like there's too much spread and disconnection between the instruments. I was was wondering why this is so? Dynamics and equalisation are different too.
> 
> Obviously, the sound coming from the left can only enters the left ear and the sound coming from the right can only enters the right ear. This doesn't occur when listening in a room through speakers - one gets a blend of the speakers in each ear.
> 
> ...


*RastPort *and a few other companies do make headphone amplifiers that provide for "mixing" the channels. This allows the user flexibility in mixing the channels, but this is rarely ever needed if the mix is done correctly by the recording engineer. I can think of some old jazz CD's I have that were "remastered" from mono source material. On some of these, the engineer decided to put one instrument in the left channel and another in the right. This produces a very odd presentation which is exposed completely with headphones. But even if listening to speakers, you get the same effect, though not as strongly pronounced since some sound from each speaker enters each ear.

You've got to remember that the two channels are meant to create a sound field which presents an image which accurately presents the instruments (vocalists) within the sound field: left to right and front to back. The single biggest thing which effects this is the choice of microphones and their placement at the recording location. If this is done well, the engineer can mix what was captured to try and reproduce what a listener would experience had they been there. This capturing and mixing, of course, is done differently by engineers and results in its own category in music awards. Does the engineer put you in the front row of the audience? Or perhaps the mix puts you too far away? The engineer's job is to recreate the location of the recording in the location where you are listening.

To overcome some of the issues of reproducing a room within a room, Neumann invented their *KU100* dummy head. Instead, the listener is transported to the location of the recording. The listener 'hears' what they would have heard if their head was at the location of the dummy head. This effect works best with headphones because all room acoustics during playback are removed from the equation of accurately reproducing the original event.

You've got to remember each speaker in your listening room is exactly like each driver in a set of headphones. The engineer's created "image" is presented accurately by headphones because room acoustics do not have an effect on it. Speakers playing back in a listening room allow the room to introduce all sorts of distortions, reflections, bumps at certain frequencies, etc. People spend a lot of money for room treatments to eliminate this effect as well as engineers creating software programs to try and equalize this effect (Dirac, ARC, Audyssey, etc.).

I've listened to speakers that have a very narrow dispersion which results in a very specific "sweet" spot in the listening room. They reproduce sound and image wonderfully, as long as you don't move laterally or vertically. As soon as you do, the pristine image is gone. This is what headphones were created for.....to give the listener the image intended by the engineer.

I listen to music in my office with headphones and in my living room with a 5.1 channel set up. Headphones are awesome, but they can not reproduce the visceral effect of near reference level sound. Speakers pressurize the room and literally let you feel the bass, which is actually what happens at a live performance.

Bottom line, if you've got a really good pair of headphones and are driving them with good equipment, the sound reproduced is just about as good as it can get.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

janxharris said:


> Curious. What effect does this switch have on your listening experience would you say?


Depends on the recording. But it definitely moves the sound toward the center. And it doesn't muddy things up.

By the way, it's a Headroom DAC/Amp (no longer made). My primary headphones (at this time) are Focal Elears and Oppo PM-2s. I live in an NYC apartment, so a lot of my listening is done with headphones.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

janxharris said:


> 100% of the sound coming from the left can of a pair of headphones enters the left ear. 0% of it enters the right ear. Vice versa regarding the right can. That isn't the case when listening through speakers.


You seem to be forgetting that the sound in each channel represents a mix of the sound from the recording venue, not just pure left and right.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Becca said:


> You seem to be forgetting that the sound in each channel represents a mix of the sound from the recording venue, not just pure left and right.


No, I agree with what you say. The difference is that the left can of the headphone set does not deliver sound to the right ear - but the left *speaker* does.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

The problem with headphones is that recordings are usually made and mixed for listening through speakers. The playback monitors at recording sessions are speakers. Binaural recordings are unfortunately rare, but with all the people today listening with earbuds and such, I'm surprised there isn't a bigger push for them. The BBC Proms concerts are recorded two ways: for speaker listening and for headphones, using one of those dummy heads. This past summer the Berlin Phil played the Schmidt 4th and both versions are on the Beeb's website - you ought to try them out. The binaural is astonishing in its realism.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

A solution is to either buy a headphone amp with built in crossfeed or buy a separate external crossfeeder to connect to the inputs of your headphone amp. I have a custom made 6-level crossfeeder made by an acoustical engineer in Helsinki that I use.

I would never listen to headphones any other way. With many recordings, the stereo separation is extreme through headphones and is very unnatural. My Helsinki engineer friend calls it spatial distortion and it is very disorienting in many recordings.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I listened through a speaker system (two 6 channel systems in 2 different size rooms) for years, but listen exclusively through headphones now. Speakers can be more dramatic than phones if they are excellent speakers, but I don’t think they represent a concert hall experience unless it is a surround sound system that provides the ambience typical of most concert halls. Also, the speaker system experience can depend on the room it’s in. Wall-to-wall carpeting will affect the sound differently from wood flooring.

Headphones don’t provide some of the realism of a good surround sound speaker system, but they have benefits. While they don’t have the surround sound experience of 5.1 speaker systems, they aren’t affected by room acoustics, they can place you in the conductor vs. the audience position (if you like that sort of thing which I do) and IMO with a good recording, you can hear instruments placed in the middle of the orchestra (eg.the winds) more distinctly. Also, headphones can accentuate separation particularly if you’re placed in the conductor position. (That can be a benefit or liability depending on one’s taste; I like separation.)

Also, referencing some comments above, if a 2-speaker, I don’t think one ear hearing speaker information from the opposite speaker provides any real benefit over headphones where mixing of the channels during the recording process gives much the same information to each ear.


----------



## rodrigaj (Dec 11, 2016)

Andolink said:


> A solution is to either buy a headphone amp with built in crossfeed or buy a separate external crossfeeder to connect to the inputs of your headphone amp. I have a custom made 6-level crossfeeder made by an acoustical engineer in Helsinki that I use.
> 
> I would never listen to headphones any other way. With many recordings, the stereo separation is extreme through headphones and is very unnatural. My Helsinki engineer friend calls it spatial distortion and it is very disorienting in many recordings.


Could you provide the name or link of an adequate external crossfeeder? I know of the amplifiers that have crossfeed, but since I have a perfectly good amplifier (Sennheiser HDVA 600) for my HD800S headphones, I can't justify the expenditure.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

There’s a different learning curve with headphones than speakers… and I certainly wouldn’t start by using closed-backed headphones, unless the absolute isolation is necessary not to disturb others, if I wanted the best sound, a sound with more air and space in it... The sound needs to escape from the headphones to a certain extent in order to sound more free and natural. 

A great set of headphones can tremendously resolve the sound in great detail and can do so at a moderate sound level. With a set that is lightweight, one can listen for hours without any listener fatigue. It’s easy to add an analog component with a hybrid/tube amp without having to spend a fortune on speakers that are comparable in sound quality. I have different sets and they’re on the ear or over the ear open-backed phones. I never hear an empty space between my ears because most recordings do not have a completely isolated left ear or right ear sound; it’s more of a blended sound these days depending on mic placement and so on. It requires experimentation to find the right set but I would never use a set that creates a pressure in the ear like some of the earbuds. Some of the crossfeed amps can be good too but I do not feel they are necessary. I wouldn’t do without the sets that I have because of the detail and privacy they allow. You can hear everything and locate everyone in space, sense depth and height, hear the players as human beings with their movements and breathing that I happen to like. There’s a different learning curve in finding the right set as an alternative to hearing sound through room speakers.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

The question is: Does music sound unnatural through headphones?

Of course, a "recording" is not necessarily the same thing as "music", and though some recordings are geared towards headphone use, others are not. But the bigger issue is something else entirely. Does _music_ sound natural?, is another way to put it.

First of all, one needs a definition of music itself. That has been debated greatly, and the jury is still out. I define music as "organized sounds and silences", even if the organization is one of randomness or of assignment (a bird, for instance, produces "music" only by the assignment of a human who dubs it as such). That aside, is "music", is "organized sounds and silences" natural? No, actually. No more natural than any art form.

Aristotle nicely describes art as an imitation of life, of the "real" world. And the real world has music only by assignment. Otherwise, it has sounds (and silences).

Of course, this is all philosophical and art-driven in its definition. To be less probing one need only consider that headphones differ from one model to the next; no two models will sound alike reproducing a source. And to extend outward, one must consider that recorded music makes use of very unnatural devices which alter the "natural" sounds and silences, and though the recording is, to put it one way, "laid down in wax", the actual resonances that are put there can only be decoded by devices of some sort or another (amplifiers, speakers, cables), and no two of those devices will reproduce the sound the same way.

And we haven't even gotten to the issue of hearers themselves, and their ears, and their ears' problems? I suspect that no two persons hears the same sounds the same way. I know that I hear differently today, in older age, than I did when I was young, back in the Baroque period I believe it was. So, what is "natural" for me is ever changing. And I suspect the same can be said by you.

The question: Does music sound unnatural through headphones? The answer: Yes. But it also sounds unnatural in any manner of hearing it. Because music is an artificial thing to begin with. It is an art form, an imitation of life, of reality. A thing experienced subjectively, never objectively, whether we want to experience it that way or not.

There seems to be a million word essay here to be written. I am not going to write it.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

No one has mentioned it, but it needs to be said: listening with speakers is safer than headphones. I worry about young people today who only listen with ear buds and often at high levels. Their hearing will suffer - not immediately - but it will catch up with them. Speakers don't put that amount of sound pressure on the ear drum - and a good subwoofer can add a visceral thrill that headphones cannot possible match.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

rodrigaj said:


> Could you provide the name or link of an adequate external crossfeeder? I know of the amplifiers that have crossfeed, but since I have a perfectly good amplifier (Sennheiser HDVA 600) for my HD800S headphones, I can't justify the expenditure.


Sorry, I don't know about any commercially made ones. I remember several years ago not finding any that did what I needed and that's why I ended up having one custom built for me.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> No one has mentioned it, but it needs to be said: listening with speakers is safer than headphones. I worry about young people today who only listen with ear buds and often at high levels. Their hearing will suffer - not immediately - but it will catch up with them. Speakers don't put that amount of sound pressure on the ear drum - and a good subwoofer can add a visceral thrill that headphones cannot possible match.


It is true that headphones and in-ear buds can particulary put hearing at risk, but speakers can very easily get above 90 dB where damage starts to occur. Digressing for a moment, I worry about the levels coming from speakers in theaters particularly during the previews. They easily reach 110-120 dB.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I listen mostly over headphones. But I do not listen in a noisy enviroments (such as public transportation) where I would need to increase the volume in order to hear the music. I listen mostly at work or at home in quite environments.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2018)

janxharris said:


> I've noticed that a lot of listeners enjoy music through headphones so I am perhaps somewhat alone on this.


I enjoy listening to music on headphones, but it is a different experience from listening through speakers. I wouldn't say one was more 'unnatural' than the other. Both are to some degree artificial.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Jacck said:


> I listen mostly over headphones. But I do not listen in a noisy enviroments (such as public transportation) where I would need to increase the volume in order to hear the music. I listen mostly at work or at home in quite environments.


There are several ways to enjoy music in a noisy environment. Noise cancelling headphones may not produce the highest quality sound, but they are improving. (And there are several that have better sound than the Bose.) Also IEMs (like those made by Etymotic), although some people find them uncomfortable. I listen to both on airplanes and NYC subways with my iPhone at about 50%.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I always listen to music through headphones. I find it aids concentration by reducing external distractions, thus helping me appreciate subtleties much more, especially with chamber/instrumental music and lieder. Plus I'm doing my neighbours a favour (not that the favour is necessarily reciprocated...). Maybe if I was lucky enough to live in a detached property away from the sounds of urban civilisation I would let it rip through the speakers but I like the way in which headphones allow me to feel cocooned within my own little world.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

If I had no other choice I would use headphones.

But in my view this type of listening is a poor substitute for non headphone use. Apart from anything else you are getting sound from a micro speaker in the headphone unit so obviously wont be anywhere near the quality of a decent wooden box hi fi speaker. And then there is the idea of perfect stereo separation feeding the sounds from one channel 100% into 1 ear and 100% of the other channel into the other ear. Where is the soundstage? In front of you it should be - not in the middle of your head.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DaveM said:


> It is true that headphones and in-ear buds can particulary put hearing at risk, but speakers can very easily get above 90 dB where damage starts to occur. Digressing for a moment, I worry about the levels coming from speakers in theaters particularly during the previews. They easily reach 110-120 dB.


Yes I had some damage in one of my ears caused by listening at very high levels - CD worst of all in the late 80s. It manifests now as a kind of crackling in one ear when I am at a concert and the orch is playing very loud passages.

Maybe that's why I listen mainly to 18thC music now - thanks Beethoven!


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

larold said:


> Music is meant to be heard in space, not confinement.


where does this tenet appear?



> It seems to me the digital generation, often listening to a phone through ear buds, cares less about sound than perhaps the stereo generation who spent lavishly on equipment. .


It seems to me that this is highly unlikely. It's more likely that we are simply seeing a cultural shift to personal music as we see in programmed viewing as well.

When I was a kid the family sat around the TV every night starring at the box. The generation before assembled to listen to the radio at night. My kids always had the luxury of their own viewing be it on a separate tv or computer. Music is no different. It's simply personalized.



> One certainly about earphones and ear buds is, if you use them relentlessly for years, you will have tinnitus in your 40s or 50s.


I use headphones today to drown out the tinnitus that I got by my 40's from using speakers.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

janxharris said:


> I always listen to music through my speakers. Listening through headphones sounds odd and strange to me - like there's too much spread and disconnection between the instruments. I was was wondering why this is so? Dynamics and equalisation are different too.
> 
> Obviously, the sound coming from the left can only enters the left ear and the sound coming from the right can only enters the right ear. This doesn't occur when listening in a room through speakers - one gets a blend of the speakers in each ear.
> 
> ...


I totally understand what you mean. For me, it's just not a big deal.

I think the entire concept of stereo is nothing but a marketing gimmick. Sell twice the speakers.

Yes it's interesting to have sound "swirl" around as 5.1 or even 2 channel can do but it's hardly a reproduction of the real world as is often the stated goal.

You seem to be bothered by the obvious artificialness of the multi speaker sound where as most, including myself, enjoy the "gimmickry."


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Becca said:


> You seem to be forgetting that the sound in each channel represents a mix of the sound from the recording venue, not just pure left and right.


Is he forgetting or simply not comfortable with the level of artificial separation?


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

stomanek said:


> If I had no other choice I would use headphones.
> 
> But in my view this type of listening is a poor substitute for non headphone use. Apart from anything else you are getting sound from a micro speaker in the headphone unit so obviously wont be anywhere near the quality of a decent wooden box hi fi speaker..


So you are saying "size matters."



On a serious note, how is greater size inherently better quality?


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Becca said:


> You seem to be forgetting that the sound in each channel represents a mix of the sound from the recording venue, not just pure left and right.


That's exactly right. With more than one mic involved, the left mic will record something of the right side of the performance, and vice versa. It's true, but one has to notice these things, and some listeners evidently don't. Under most circumstances, there's no hundred percent isolation of the left and right channels unless a particular instrument is deliberately isolated from the rest in a sound booth.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

eljr said:


> So you are saying "size matters."
> 
> 
> 
> *On a serious note, how is greater size inherently better quality?*


Its not as such. But a class A pair of headphones should not sound better than a class A pair of speakers - given the same setup otherwise. Clean deep base from a pair of speakers the size of a 50p piece?

Perhaps I am wrong but I dont see how.

Im interested that you see stereo as an unnecessary gimmick - how do you justify that? I am not saying it is wrong as I could never quite see the point of stereo unless you want a convincing soundstage. But would like to hear your reasons.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Larkenfield said:


> That's exactly right. With more than one mic involved, the left mic will record something of the right side of the performance, and vice versa. It's true, but one has to notice these things, and some listeners evidently don't. Under most circumstances, there's no hundred percent isolation of the left and right channels unless a particular instrument is deliberately isolated from the rest in a sound booth.


Yes we do notice these things. But as has been pointed out - when listening in a room with a well placed pair of speakers - there is bound to be a more natural crossover and mix of sound. Plus you dont sit on a chair with your 2 speakers pointed one directly at one ear. Music fills the room and there is a well balanced spatial mix of left and right.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2018)

stomanek said:


> Its not as such. But a class A pair of headphones should not sound better than a class A pair of speakers - given the same setup otherwise. Clean deep base from a pair of speakers the size of a 50p piece?


There is no law of physics that says a small object can't be driven to oscillate at an arbitrarily low frequency. The reason large drivers are required for low frequency is that more air displacement is required to generate a given audio power for a low frequency. It takes a large driver to create same sound intensity at low frequency as a small tweeter creates at high frequency. A headphone is designed to create the wave in your ear canal, so a small driver can suffice even for low frequency. The main problem human physiology. Low frequency is channeled by your entire head (or even your body) not just by your ear canal so a headphone can't create the full experience of profound bass.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Baron Scarpia said:


> There is no law of physics that says a small object can't be driven to oscillate at an arbitrarily low frequency. The reason large drivers are required for low frequency is that more air displacement is required to generate a given audio power for a low frequency. It takes a large driver to create same sound intensity at low frequency as a small tweeter creates at high frequency. A headphone is designed to create the wave in your ear canal, so a small driver can suffice even for low frequency. The main problem human physiology. Low frequency is channeled by your entire head (or even your body) not just by your ear canal so a headphone can't create the full experience of profound bass.


Thank you for backing up my point.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Unnatural it is perhaps, though quite what is meant by "natural" exactly I am not sure. However, I must say that the sound I get through my headphones is generally superior to that I have experienced live at the opera (Deutsche Oper two weeks ago) or the concert hall (Berliner Philharmonie) in good seats. Just saying...


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

KRoad said:


> Unnatural it is perhaps, though quite what is meant by "natural" exactly I am not sure. However, I must say that the sound I get through my headphones is generally superior to that I have experienced live at the opera (Deutsche Oper two weeks ago) or the concert hall (Berliner Philharmonie) in good seats. Just saying...


So now headphone listening is better than a night at the opera.

that's it guys - I'm in the wrong place. I'm off to find a - SERIOUS - classical music forum.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

stomanek said:


> Thank you for backing up my point.


If you read close he did not.

Maybe it was your intent to say what @Baron Scarpia said.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Unnatural it is perhaps, though quite what is meant by "natural" exactly I am not sure. However, I must say that the sound I get *through my headphones is generally superior* to that I have experienced live at the opera (Deutsche Oper two weeks ago) or the concert hall (Berliner Philharmonie) in good seats. Just saying... _

It isn't natural and it is superior for you but not me. The sound you get through your headphones is closer to the signal the recording offers, not anything natural. Recordings, even those made today that are said to be more realistic than in the past when up to 20 microphones were used and the whole thing was mixed into a stereo soup, are unnatural.

This is also true for so-called "live" recordings which are usually composites of multiple recordings. I've even heard old-fashioned solo instrument spotlighting -- spontaneously making a flute louder than the whole orchestra -- and gain riding (dial twisting the volume) on them.

Yet a lifetime spent listening to them and newer technologies has convinced people they are better. What you heard at Deutsche Oper is natural. It is also real. You may think it inferior but that is you.

I downloaded some music recently to make a CD of choral music I had on LP for years. The LP was from the 1950s and fairly natural. The downloads were anything but; the solo singers were so far ahead of the chorus it sounded like they were in the room with me while the chorus and orchestra were both somewhere down the street.

I'll never forget a guy I saw on a program about Caruso discussing his recordings from the 1920s. He said, "I know when I hear these I hear Caruso."

That's because there was no way to amplify anything or add anything to his voice in early recordings. It wasn't much different through the mono era though enterprising people used reverb and echo chambers to enhance recordings, not to mention techs that twisted the dials.

My first experience with the unreality of recordings was when I went to concert to see a famous cellist whose version of the Elgar concerto I'd listened to. When I heard him in concert his tone was so small I barely heard him over the orchestra. I've had this experience repeated many times with soloists, singers and even orchestras.

Recordings today are better than reality and they make mediocrities sound like geniuses. I don't see any way using headphones or ear buds often makes that any less true. I think those things are OK when you have to confine sound but not otherwise.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

eljr said:


> If you read close he did not.
> 
> Maybe it was your intent to say what @Baron Scarpia said.


The essence is the same - the vibrations of sounds waves affect the whole body when listening to music and you miss that with headphone listening as you do the benefits of the ambience of the room or space where you are listening - furnishings etc can soften otherwise harsh passages - part in music like Mahler - music that would melt your eardrums with headphones part if there is a quiet passage where you turn up the vol and BANG! You know what I mean.

I also stick to my belief that a good pair of speakers will reproduce more accurately across the sonic range than headphones by virtue of having much bigger drivers and more than 1 per channel on really good speakers. Furthermore - the socket you plug your headphones into is driven by a relatively simple amplification circuit unless you are using an amp dedicated to headphone listening. It's going to be like a $30 amp even if you have spent $1000 on your amp. And in the mixing studio the technicians do the mixing not for headphone addicts but for speaker presentation. Some of the reasons people give for headphones just shows what poor systems many have - like you get more detail with headphones - this just says you need a better front end. All these reasons and more are enough for me to put my sennheiser headphones circa 1997 on ebay and get rid.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Music is meant to be heard in space, not confinement...where does this tenet appear? _

Ask any classical musician. Recordings change music, make it artificially louder, "better" and change spatial arrangements of sound. The extent to which these changes are made today changes the music quite a lot, more than air brushing, paint and contrast changes the shape and appearance of magazine cover models.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2018)

stomanek said:


> Thank you for backing up my point.


I am agreeing with part of your argument.

You have a valid point that profound bass is not perceived by the ears along and you will not feel the same impact with headphones, even though good ones reproduce bass all the way to the limits of human hearing.

With regard to room reflections, they are more of a problem than a benefit.

Your brain localizes sound sources mainly by comparing the arrival time at the left and right ear. If something is on the left it will arrive at the left ear first, and vice versa. Depending on the position the delay will be larger or smaller, and there will be no relative delay for sound sources directly in front. With speakers whatever comes from your left speaker reaches your right ear with a fixed delay, and the vice versa for the right speaker. Even though the recording engineer will try to game your brain's audio processing to create a soundstage, there are always spurious time delayed signals reaching your ears. For a program that has been mixed with a view to headphone listening, headphones can produce much more realistic imaging, since you don't get spurious delays from multiple signal paths from the drivers to your ears.

It will depend on how the recording is engineered. If a recording is engineered specifically for speakers it can sound very unsatisfying on headphones, but use of cross-feed can reproduce the imaging you would have gotten from speakers. But for a recording which is appropriately engineered headphone's can produce more satisfying imaging, in my experience.

The worst cases are some of the early stereo recordings. They would put an instrument entirely in the left or right channel, and you brain simply fails to process sound that it can't compare on left and right ear, causing a weird disembodied effect. Headphone cross-feed can resolve this problem.

I think the ideal thing might be to listen to headphones with a subwoofer in the room. That would be particularly annoying for anyone who overhears it.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

larold said:


> _Unnatural it is perhaps, though quite what is meant by "natural" exactly I am not sure. However, I must say that the sound I get *through my headphones is generally superior* to that I have experienced live at the opera (Deutsche Oper two weeks ago) or the concert hall (Berliner Philharmonie) in good seats. Just saying... _
> 
> It isn't natural and it is superior for you but not me. The sound you get through your headphones is closer to the signal the recording offers, not anything natural. Recordings, even those made today that are said to be more realistic than in the past when up to 20 microphones were used and the whole thing was mixed into a stereo soup, are unnatural.
> 
> ...


Some good points.

I think the poster of that comments about headphone listening being superior sound to live opera simply means this: he was more impressed with the sound experience from the headphones.

Now I knew a guy that was big in the analogue record player business - he had about 6 models and the most expensive was £5000. Very successful - dead now Im afraid. But I remember listening to his top end kit and thinking - this all sounds laid back and its not in your face - which is the opposite of what I had experienced with the level of hifi I was using at the time. I think he could sense my disappointment and he told me - many listeners are not interested in music when they buy hifi - they want sound effects. It took me some time to understand what he was talking about - recordings made to impress- close miked soloists - thundering bass - soaring treble and equipment that makes it all sound so impressive. So when I hear people say they prefer home listening to live music or headphones to a night at the opera - I understand the reasons behind these comments.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Low frequency is channeled by your entire head (or even your body) not just by your ear canal so a headphone can't create the full experience of profound bass._

I experienced that at a concert last year when four doublebasses in an orchestra created a larger bass sound than I can ever recall in an orchestra. They shook the place. I've never heard that on a recording.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_I think the poster of that comments about headphone listening being superior sound to live opera simply means this: he was more impressed with the sound experience from the headphones._

I think that is true as well and I think the reason for that is a lifetime of listening to recordings has changed his/her mental image of music. Now s/he thinks an electronic approximation of music is better than music itself.

I have no quibble with anyone that thinks that way; we are all creatures of preference. But there should be no confusing a substitute for the real thing.

In effect s/he is preferring the medium and not the message.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2018)

My view is that a live performance is the gold standard, and I like recordings that reproduce the experience. My preference is for labels that make "minimal" recordings with a natural concert hall sound. Mercury Living Presence, Living Stereo, Philips, Telefunken, Telarc were labels in that tradition. DG made good recordings in the 60's, but went down the road of spotlighting and manipulation.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I much prefer a great set of speakers to a pair of cans but ill listen to my music on anything I can.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

stomanek said:


> Yes we do notice these things. But as has been pointed out - when listening in a room with a well placed pair of speakers - there is bound to be a more natural crossover and mix of sound. Plus you dont sit on a chair with your 2 speakers pointed one directly at one ear. Music fills the room and there is a well balanced spatial mix of left and right.


 I was referring to the recording process in which there's a natural crossfeed between the left and right channels when recorded with more than one mic-by crossfeed I mean that one can hear something of the cellos in an orchestra on the right side through the left channel, though of course more in the distance. There's of course a natural crossfeed effect in listening to music through speakers too. But that's not what I was referring to. In other words, there's a natural crossfeed that can be heard when listening through a headset that is not dependent on hearing the music through outside speakers. One can hear the ambiance in the recording studio or the concert hall through headphones.

Who listens to speakers or headsets exclusively? I don't. One is simply an alternative to the other, depending upon one's personal circumstances. If I don't want to disturb somebody else, it seems perfectly natural to me to listen through headphones where a flute still sounds like a flute, a piano still sounds like a piano, a symphony orchestra still sounds like a symphony orchestra. There's nothing unnatural about either. Unless instruments are isolated in their own sound booth, which of course can sometimes happen, there's going to be crossfeed in the recording process, and for some that's crossfeed enough. But if somebody doesn't have a pair of headphones sensitive enough to pick up the ambiance in a recording studio or a live concert, then they're going to think it's not there, and that's generally not true. Audiophile headphones are not known to be cheap.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Larkenfield said:


> I was referring to the recording process in which there's a natural crossfeed between the left and right channels when recorded with more than one mic-by crossfeed I mean that one can hear something of the cellos on the right side through the left channel, though of course more in the distance. There's of course a natural crossfeed effect in listening to music through speakers too. But that's not what I was referring to. In other words, there's a natural crossfeed that can be heard when listening through a headset that is not dependent on hearing the music through outside speakers. One can hear the ambience in the recording studio or the concert hall through headphones. Who listens to speakers or headsets exclusively? I don't. One is simply an alternative to the other depending upon one's personal circumstances. If I don't want to disturb somebody else, it seems perfectly natural to me to listen through headphones where a flute still sounds like a flute, a piano still sounds like a piano, a symphony orchestra still sounds like a symphony orchestra. There's nothing unnatural about either. Unless instruments are isolated in their own sound booth, which of course can sometimes happens, there's going to be crossfeed in the recording process, and for some that's crossfeed enough. But if somebody doesn't have a pair of headphones sensitive enough to pick up the ambience in a recording studio or a live concert, then they're going to think it's not there, and that's generally not true. Audiophile headphones are not known to be cheap.


There's the ambience of the rec studio - and the ambience of the room in which you listen.

The fact is with speakers your left ear picks up in equal measure SP1 SP2 and your right ear picks up SP1 and SP2 in equal measure. With headphones your left ear gets SP1 and your right ear gets SP2.

What do you imagine is better as a listening experience? With speakers it is clear that the brain has much more information from which to re-create the recorded performance.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2018)

stomanek said:


> There's the ambience of the rec studio - and the ambience of the room in which you listen.
> 
> The fact is with speakers your left ear picks up in equal measure SP1 SP2 and your right ear picks up SP1 and SP2 in equal measure. With headphones your left ear gets SP1 and your right ear gets SP2.
> 
> What do you imagine is better as a listening experience? With speakers it is clear that the brain has much more information from which to re-create the recorded performance.


You have not define SP1 or SP2.

In principal the brain has more information with headphones. The right and left channels are kept distinct. With speakers the left and right channels get mixed with uncontrolled time delays due to reflections from various surfaces in your room. The sound reaching your ears from speakers is scrambled and your brain has to unscramble it. Information can only be lost when signal channels are mixed. You can't use "information" as a argument for why speakers can sound better to you.

If a recording is correctly prepared for headphone listening then all of the direct and reflected sound from the recording venue is already present in the source and doesn't benefit from extra reflections from your living room.

Of course, many recordings, especially older ones, are specifically engineered for speakers. They may be lacking in reflected indirect sound components and have artificially high channel separation. They sound bad on headphones, not because headphones loose information, but because the recordings contain artificial information that needs be be mitigated by a speaker system.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

stomanek said:


> *The essence is the same* - the vibrations of sounds waves affect the whole body when listening to music and you miss that with headphone listening as you do the benefits of the ambience of the room or space where you are listening - furnishings etc can soften otherwise harsh passages - part in music like Mahler - music that would melt your eardrums with headphones part if there is a quiet passage where you turn up the vol and BANG! You know what I mean.
> 
> I also stick to my belief that a good pair of speakers will reproduce more accurately across the sonic range than headphones by virtue of having much bigger drivers and more than 1 per channel on really good speakers. Furthermore - the socket you plug your headphones into is driven by a relatively simple amplification circuit unless you are using an amp dedicated to headphone listening. It's going to be like a $30 amp even if you have spent $1000 on your amp. And in the mixing studio the technicians do the mixing not for headphone addicts but for speaker presentation. Some of the reasons people give for headphones just shows what poor systems many have - like you get more detail with headphones - this just says you need a better front end. All these reasons and more are enough for me to put my sennheiser headphones circa 1997 on ebay and get rid.


No, it is not.

You never referenced the physical interactions, which confidentially, was why I challenged someone on another forum recently when they suggested music was more exciting on headphones.

If you meat to say this, fine. If you had, I would not have challenged you.

Not a big deal, as in teh end we agree as we both prefer speakers and both understand the advantage in "feeling" the sound waves.

I disagree with you as to enjoying the benefits of reflective sound in a room. An audiophile will go to great lengths to eliminate this.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

stomanek said:


> . . .
> 
> I also stick to my belief that a good pair of speakers will reproduce more accurately across the sonic range than headphones by virtue of having much bigger drivers and more than 1 per channel on really good speakers. Furthermore - the socket you plug your headphones into is driven by a relatively simple amplification circuit unless you are using an amp dedicated to headphone listening. It's going to be like a $30 amp even if you have spent $1000 on your amp. And in the mixing studio the technicians do the mixing not for headphone addicts but for speaker presentation. Some of the reasons people give for headphones just shows what poor systems many have - like you get more detail with headphones - this just says you need a better front end. All these reasons and more are enough for me to put my sennheiser headphones circa 1997 on ebay and get rid.


I have a $20,000 stereo system, which I enjoy, but I get more detail from my old $300 AKG 701 'phones. That's what I listen to when I want to follow the lines in a Bach fugue.

And yes, I do have headphone amps for serious listening.

As for technicians, I'm not sure what is true for classical, but I would bet you anything that most popular music is mixed for headphones. That's where the money is these days. The high end headphone market, except I guess for Stax, really only sprang to life in the past decade. And it's not just as fashion accessories (although that's a dominant aspect); there are some amazingly good headphones nowadays.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

eljr said:


> No, it is not.
> 
> You never referenced the physical interactions, which confidentially, was why I challenged someone on another forum recently when they suggested music was more exciting on headphones.
> 
> ...


I have lost track of this and what it is we disagree on.

I know there are people who prefer headphone listening. In my view its not that different to people who rarely go to musical concerts and now simply enjoy the technology etc as they have forgotten what a live performance sounds like - the sound effects. It makes me sad in a way but its their choice.

I had a friend who was crazy about 1 particular performance of carmina burana and when I gave him an alternative rec to listen to (Previn EMI) he said - yes but the trumpets dont jump out at you like in this recording. Sure enough he was right. Then one day we went to hear a live perf and after he said - I didnt like that - where were those trumpets! Let's get back to my place and get that CD out.

I give up.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

jegreenwood said:


> I have a $20,000 stereo system, which I enjoy, but I get more detail from my old $300 AKG 701 'phones. That's what I listen to when I want to follow the lines in a Bach fugue.
> 
> And yes, I do have headphone amps for serious listening.
> 
> As for technicians, I'm not sure what is true for classical, but I would bet you anything that most popular music is mixed for headphones. That's where the money is these days. The high end headphone market, except I guess for Stax, really only sprang to life in the past decade. And it's not just as fashion accessories (although that's a dominant aspect); there are some amazingly good headphones nowadays.


Ive heard some very ordinary sounding so called top end systems. You have a 20K system and cant get good enough detail to enjoy a bach fugue. That should tell you something if you need to resort to headphone listening. What front end?

I am quite certain the classical music recordings are engineering for stereo soundstage delivered from speakers not phones.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

“Realistic bass requires a kinesthetic element that produces the feeling of vibration around and inside you. Headphones can't do that.”

Through years of personal listening experience, I have found this to be untrue. Only with some headphones. Even with the relatively inexpensive Koss PortaPros, there’s a definite tactile, physical, kinesthetic experience that can be vibrationally felt on the ears and in the head, whether it's the entire body or not, without destroying one's hearing through excessive volume. That’s what I like about them, but it's not an essential for experiencing every recording. The same is true with most of the Grado headphones, such as the SR-80s and any of the ones in the SR series. The bass can be felt as well as heard. But the point is going to escape those who aren’t really into listening with headphones, to begin with. 

Headphones can be absolutely amazing for hearing details at moderate volume levels, not disturbing others, and for a kinesthetic experience. But again, not all headphones have that ability and it usually requires testing them out... I would estimate that during the last 10 years most of my listening experience has been through headphones (greatly enhanced by using a hybrid/tube amp) because of their intimacy, privacy, acoustic details, consideration of others, and affordability. Another great advantage, already mentioned by others, is that one doesn’t have to worry about difficult room acoustics that can inhibit and dull the sound. 

For me, it's not about pitting headphones as being superior to speakers, or vice versa, but understanding the advantages and attributes of each according to one's own needs and circumstances, and that means understanding that headphones are also capable of creating a visceral experience, period, depending upon the make and model. But those who already have an obvious deep-seated bias against headphones aren't ever likely to get that far, are they? Great enjoyment from excellent speakers capable of vibrating an entire room can, of course, be thrilling, but the sound will never get to the ears as fast, ever. So there are trade-offs in the two ways of listening: one that's more inward and perhaps more introspective, and one that’s more wide-open acoustically that bounces joyously off the furniture, ceiling, and walls... I enjoy both.
:tiphat:


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Larkenfield said:


> "Realistic bass requires a kinesthetic element that produces the feeling of vibration around and inside you. Headphones can't do that."
> 
> Through years of personal listening experience, I have found this to be untrue. Only with some headphones. Even with the relatively inexpensive Koss PortaPros, there's a definite tactile, physical, kinesthetic experience that can be vibrationally felt on the ears and in the head, whether it's the entire body or not, without destroying one's hearing through excessive volume. That's what I like about them, but it's not an essential for experiencing every recording. The same is true with most of the Grado headphones, such as the SR-80s and any of the ones in the SR series. The bass can be felt as well as heard. But the point is going to escape those who aren't really into listening with headphones, to begin with.
> 
> ...


I dont listen to pop much but I have heard systems that do produce a satisfying thump in the solar plexus. you are not telling me that is achievable with headphones.

Sounds gets to the ear quicker with headphones? Then sit and listen to your headphones and dont bother with concerts because the sound would take even longer to reach you. The main point is not how many nano seconds the sound waves take to reach your ears.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

stomanek said:


> Ive heard some very ordinary sounding so called top end systems. You have a 20K system and cant get good enough detail to enjoy a bach fugue. That should tell you something if you need to resort to headphone listening. What front end?
> 
> I am quite certain the classical music recordings are engineering for stereo soundstage delivered from speakers not phones.


Ayre SACD player, pre-amp and amp. I also stream through a TEAC UD-501.

What is the basis for your certainty on how engineers handle classical?


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

stomanek said:


> I had a friend who was crazy about 1 particular performance of carmina burana and when I gave him an alternative rec to listen to (Previn EMI) he said - yes but the trumpets dont jump out at you like in this recording. Sure enough he was right. Then one day we went to hear a live perf and after he said - I didnt like that - where were those trumpets! Let's get back to my place and get that CD out.
> 
> I give up.


Great story.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Larkenfield said:


> the sound will never get to the ears as fast, ever.
> :tiphat:


Good post but this statement kinda baffled me.

It's relative so it's irreverent. :tiphat:


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

jegreenwood said:


> Ayre SACD player, pre-amp and amp. I also stream through a TEAC UD-501.
> 
> What is the basis for your certainty on how engineers handle classical?


what speakers and headphones do you use?


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

janxharris said:


> I always listen to music through my speakers. Listening through headphones sounds odd and strange to me - like there's too much spread and disconnection between the instruments. I was was wondering why this is so? Dynamics and equalisation are different too.
> 
> Obviously, the sound coming from the left can only enters the left ear and the sound coming from the right can only enters the right ear. This doesn't occur when listening in a room through speakers - one gets a blend of the speakers in each ear.
> 
> ...


If the goal of listening to music on a home system is to transport the listener to the venue where it was recorded (which is the goal that I adhere to), then yes, headphones are unnatural.

Live music does not appear to emanate in your brain, which is how I perceive listening with headphones. Live music emanates from a stage in front of you, and travels through the air. Sure, the music is very clear and detailed with headphones, but it sounds unnatural to me.

Other problems I have with headphones, are, they lack visceral impact. Dynamics are there, but they don't hit you like through speakers. Same with bass. You can hear the bass, but there is no visceral impact from it. After all, the headphones are only energizing a teaspoon of air in your ear canal, speakers are energizing a volume of maybe 1200 or more feet in a room. There's room for low frequency wave propagation. There's a physical feeling from the system, not just the sound.

So, even though I own a pair of costly Grado headphones and a Leman headphone amp, I very rarely find myself using them.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

eljr said:


> what speakers and headphones do you use?


My primary system speakers are PSB Synchrony 2s. My secondary system has Thiel 1.5s.

I have a number of headphones. I do most of my serious listening through Focal Elears and Oppo PM-2s. None of the above provide the detail of the AKG 701s, but the AKGs have other shortcomings.

A better example (or perhaps a more specific one) - I especially enjoy listening to OVPP performances of Bach on the AKGs where I can focus on one musical line at a time.

And as for body shaking bass - I'd be kicked out on the street from my apartment if I played music that loud.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

jegreenwood said:


> My primary system speakers are PSB Synchrony 2s. My secondary system has Thiel 1.5s.
> 
> I have a number of headphones. I do most of my serious listening through Focal Elears and Oppo PM-2s. None of the above provide the detail of the AKG 701s, but the AKGs have other shortcomings.
> 
> ...


I understand. I prefer acoustic works with my ribbon speakers and orchestra on my "A" system.

I am VERY impressed with PSB speakers. I have an entry level PSB bookshelf that I use in my place down south.

Currently, I am toying with the idea of buying another set of headphones. What do you recommend? I am leaning toward Grado.

As to bass, I took my subs out of my "A" system. Just not needed (two 13 inchers.)


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

jegreenwood said:


> Ayre SACD player, pre-amp and amp. I also stream through a TEAC UD-501.
> 
> What is the basis for your certainty on how engineers handle classical?


I dont claim absolute certainty but I am quite certain rather - prove me wrong if you can.

I base it on some comments of a sound and recording engineer who works for hyperion i was chatting to a while ago - and some talk on various forums and deductive reasoning. Speakers outsell headphones being one. I never heard it suggested before that classical recordings are geared up to headphone junkies since the majority of classical listeners - I believe - would regard speaker presentation as their first preference - something backed up by comments on this thread - only a minority actually claim to prefer headphone listening.

lets switch that around - I have told you my belief - what is yours? and how do you justify it? Or are you going to sit on the fence and say you don't know one way or another. That seems the safest option but I feel my belief has strong justification.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

stomanek said:


> I dont claim absolute certainty but I am quite certain rather - prove me wrong if you can.
> 
> I base it on some comments of a sound and recording engineer who works for hyperion i was chatting to a while ago - and some talk on various forums and deductive reasoning. Speakers outsell headphones being one. I never heard it suggested before that classical recordings are geared up to headphone junkies since the majority of classical listeners - I believe - would regard speaker presentation as their first preference - something backed up by comments on this thread - only a minority actually claim to prefer headphone listening.
> 
> lets switch that around - I have told you my belief - what is yours? and how do you justify it? Or are you going to sit on the fence and say you don't know one way or another. That seems the safest option but I feel my belief has strong justification.


As I said above, I live in a NYC apartment - a post-war 1 bedroom in Manhattan. This places significant constraints on my music listening. My speakers are as well placed as they can be, but they are not optimal. My neighbors on one side have a one year old, and the walls are not soundproof. Although my apartment does not face the street, I cannot escape sirens or summer parties outside. And the pipes. Thus, it is the rare occasion when I can listen to speakers without interference.

So, as the quality of headphones has improved over the last decade, I have been more and more drawn to them. Open back headphones won't block all of that but they mitigate it. And sometimes, the best way for me to listen to music is with closed back phones - mostly PSB M4U-2s, which also have noise cancellation that leaves the sound more or less intact.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

jegreenwood said:


> As I said above, I live in a NYC apartment - a post-war 1 bedroom in Manhattan. This places significant constraints on my music listening. My speakers are as well placed as they can be, but they are not optimal. My neighbors on one side have a one year old, and the walls are not soundproof. Although my apartment does not face the street, I cannot escape sirens or summer parties outside. And the pipes. Thus, it is the rare occasion when I can listen to speakers without interference.
> 
> So, as the quality of headphones has improved over the last decade, I have been more and more drawn to them. Open back headphones won't block all of that but they mitigate it. And sometimes, the best way for me to listen to music is with closed back phones - mostly PSB M4U-2s, which also have noise cancellation that leaves the sound more or less intact.


OK I did not take that into account. Yes I have lived in flats too and I always hated listening to other people living their lives and yes I did use phones. I have been in a detached house for 25 years and obviously can blaze out my music how I want and this is probably the reason I dont feel a need to use them. Yes I would use them if I was in your situation and get the best I could afford.


----------



## Guest (Nov 20, 2018)

For orchestral music, all else equal, I prefer speakers. But as I think I said somewhere above, it depends on the recording to some extent. I'm sure engineers these days take care to make recordings that are a compromise between headphone and loudspeaker listening. I think I might very well prefer headphones if true binaural recordings were widely available.

Aside from pure audio considerations, there is a non-negligible advantage to headphones, namely that there is no worry that your listening is disturbing someone, either in your household or on the other side of a wall.


----------

