[Guidostrunk]

Speakers are great.......... But they will never be Headphones

. Goes both ways. A bigger WOW factor from phones IMO. That something so small could sound so big. Big sound is expected form .....well ..... Big speakers.

 

[SP Wild]

This has been a most enlightening thread.  I find Golden Ears posts to be of high value and very insightful.
 
I particularly like his unified "wave launch" theory and the concept of setting up an elite speaker system that is "better than live".  The only time I was ever convinced that speakers can, in fact, portray an illusion of a live musical stage was when I auditioned Legacy speakers to the value of $30,000...these were large, imposing speakers that did in fact give me a believable sensation that I was in the front row of a large stage...in a much smaller auditioning room.  Big speakers were needed to complete the illusion for a big stage sound...smaller bookshelves and floorstanding models were nice...but unconvincing.  Headphones, even less so in this regard.
 
The concept of a headstage, I can understand...but I can never understand how someone can say so and so headphones put me on row X or front row or at  the back, perhaps I just can't picture any such "soundstage" so to speak of...not even with the highly vaunted K1000 or HD800, all I can say is with those, the sound is moved an inch from my eyes...hardly any rows can be perceived, not to my imagination.
 
Skillfully mastered studio recordings (and some very skillfully mastered "live" recordings) always sounded more convincing than any "live concerts" that I had ever heard.  I could only imagine that such recordings played via elite speakers and amplification would be an aural sensation.
 
I remember being at Sydney's Darling Harbour not so long ago.  An ensemble of about 50 musicians were outdoors, it was all wind and reed instruments with a drumkit, flutes, trumpets, trombones...horns etc.  No amplification.  When they started blaring in unison...I thought to myself, wow...there must be kilowatts and  kilowatts of raw energy powering through the open atmosphere with pure unadulterated harmonic content.  To this day, I've yet to hear any speakers that will convince me that I was there...live.
 
Also, I have been surrounded by the sounds of heavy industrial machinery often, and in many ways...this is aurally stimulating, to be able to hear the power and perfection of machinery, really gives another angle to the whole audio reproduction concept.
 
I never believed that speakers could correctly reproduce the ambiance and atmosphere of a real performance.  In light of my experience with true hi-end, I have been proven somewhat wrong.  Though not perfect...if you close your eyes, you will be fooled.  Headphones at this stage of development don't come remotely close.  But in my room, in my imagination, in my headphone world I think I've come as close as I'm ever going to get...until I move on to not just any speakers...but speakers that can achieve this "uniform wave launch" powered by kilowatts and kilowatts of raw electrical horsepower.
 
In the meantime, I'd be quite happy with a high quality small speaker ensemble when I find a new location.  I have been educated by the world of headphones and this will assist my component auditioning and selection.  If they can convince me of a small acoustic performance, I'd be rapt.

 

[Confispect]

Interesting read...

 

[matbhuvi]

There is one thing headphones can give that speakers can't give.
 
Privacy!
 
Either be it in your home (individual house or apartment), you can really enjoy speaker music only when you get full privacy. 
I can't raise the volume beyond a certain point in my apartment. My wife just starts the vacuuming the floor when i start listening to music. I can never win arguing with her 

. Even when i have the opportunity, my 4 year little angel runs around me, plays around me and always want to talk with me. For me, she sounds better than any music in this world. So, i can never ignore her.
 
I only get my time after she goes to sleep and put my head phones over my head after 9:00. And i regularly use them when i commute to office in public transport.
 
Headphones and Speakers will co-exist. They can't replace each other. 

 

[Woody469]

I recently moved and after setting up my home rig with turntable etc I fired it up. What a difference a room makes! 
It hit me all at once. "So this is what I paid for" with a grin from ear to ear.
I agree, great audio will stop you in your tracks, make you immediately sit down in the sweet spot and hold you there like a vise. Period
 
I do buy a lot of portable audio gear too but there really is no comparison. Is it silly? No, not to me. My HiFiMan HM801 into the Stepdance out to the LCD-2 is far from silly.

 

[Golden Ears]

 
I have been getting this thread some thought,
 
This thead of the more interesting ones on this website. Perhaps the blessed ones by the tone deaf young women who can dance to their heart's delight to a MONO AM clock radio in their dorm room.
 
There's a little bit of evolutionary substance to the hobby of high-end audio.
 
One headphone company surmised (Ultrasone) that the outer ear served to give us a certain amount of directionality as to where sounds came from, and without the outer ear we wouldn't know if a mountain lion or bear was in front of us or behind us.
 
Also, could you possibly become a good hunter 200 years ago without good directional hearing? I'm sure there would be some exceptions, …..some unusually gifted hunter who had lost his hearing–but the reality is that hearing the crack of a twig with a rustle of pebbles–or the quack of a mallard duck–might quickly result in food for your family if you are able to locate the animal quickly before it could run away.
 
Historically most women were at home raising the children, preparing the food, mending clothes. They might sing to make their own music–and it would be MONO not stereo. Perhaps that's why women are satisfied for the most part with extremely low fidelity sound systems.
 
As male hunters we have to be able to discern between the sound of a cracking twig made by a 10 pound armadillo, versus the sound of the twig cracking made by a three-year-old tender Deer. The armadillo, while edible, require much more effort to prepare and likely would not yield usable clothing material.
 
For that reason, it would make sense that a successful man who is able to put food and clothing on the table would have his choice of mates and his gene pool would continue–while, a man with poor hearing, and perhaps poor eyesight, in a purely hunter gatherer society might find it hard to get a mate–unless perhaps he possessed some superior skills in building hunting tools, or cookware for instance and was able to trade and not be robbed.
 
Women, have extended high-frequency response most likely so they can discern when their OWN CHILD is crying. In a hunter gatherer society some of the children are collectively watched by other women while those women go about their task.
 
So the ability here young Williams high-pitched scream and be able to discern this high-pitched scream from Charlie's–the child of another woman, is important. Particularly if William is being threatened, perhaps by mountain lion, perhaps by a wild boar, etc. so the woman could quickly intervene and save the child's life.
 
The woman does not have to locate the sounds, but merely have to intervene when there is a threat.
 
So with that in mind, you can see how men are more concerned with imaging and sound stage and tonality than women are.
 
Women may be able to discern these things just as well as men, but innately it is not a major concern of theirs.
 
So in regards to creating a sound system, we only have so much money to go down the road. Perhaps you could look at money as being gasoline–the only have so much gasoline to go so far and you don’t want to end up 1/2 way there.
 
So it helps to try to build a balanced sound system. Certainly if you spend too much money on one component you might not get there from here because you would have to shortchange yourself on other components.
 
A lot of people begin their search for the absolute sound with dynamic speakers–the type of normal speakers we associate with the word loudspeaker.
 
So we tried to find more resolving traditional loudspeakers, that require a certain amount of amplifier power and control, and we tried to reproduce sounds using these loudspeakers.
 
If you believe that force equals mass times acceleration– (trust me this is not going to be complicated…fear not physics/math haters)
 
F=MA
 
Acceleration is a derivative of velocity so it is a squared relationship.  So if an object slows down twice as quickly it will require the square of the force. Ever wonder why it takes longer to slow from 110mph to 90 than from 40mph to 20mph? That’s why.
 
Quickly you can see that the heavier the mass we are trying to accelerate or decelerate may require more force. The more force you have the more problems you may have with induced electro magnetic induction, you may develop problems with residual capacitance and so forth. In a traditional loudspeaker with more loudness you move further from the magnetic gap…giving you less control ie…less resolution.
 
But most of us start with traditional loudspeakers. And we try to find the best amplification in the best version of a traditional loudspeaker we can afford… initially. If you only have a limited amount of money you have to be pretty fuel-efficient to get down that road.
 
So for the most part, we’re going to try to fix the inherent problem with traditional loudspeakers.
 
Here is an aside–
 
When we first recorded music we use a microphone to do so. A ribbon microphone has a diaphragm with very small mass. It is very easy to accelerate and decelerate the ribbon microphone with exceedingly small pressure waves. It is sensitive to subtleties and small nuances.
 
If you try using a less sensitive microphone that has a diaphragm of very high mass it's easy to see that in light pressure waves would not have enough force to push the diaphragm to generate any electrical currents. As a result that microphone might MISS some of the initial recording. Perhaps the sound of the cymbal shimmering into silence will be chopped off near the end–truncated if you will.
 
So now with an inferior microphone we are going to try to reproduce a recording using traditional loudspeakers and try to make it sound like the original music event, despite the fact that some of the musical information has been irrevocably lost.
 
By using a tube amplifier driving the amplifier into slight distortion–musical shimmer made by the cymbals and drums will be synthetically created by the tube amplifier albeit fake, and when played through traditional loudspeakers this extended musical “tail” will be synthetically re-created an extended long enough so that even the traditional dynamic loudspeaker (of reasonable quality) can reproduce this sound.
 
In my opinion, even though it is a euphonic distortion, you may get slightly closer to the musical event when you use a tube amplifier as compared to solid state amplifiers with traditional dynamic loudspeakers. Even though this is not exactly as it sounds…at least it will not sound as glaringly fake as with cheap transistor amps.
 
However, if the recording is well made, with high-resolution microphones that are appropriately placed, then a better reproduction of the musical event will occur when you use planar diaphragm speakers with very light diaphragms, and very high-quality solid-state amplifiers. It's my opinion that tube amplifiers can impart too much of euphonic distortion and the resultant reproduction can sound smeared. Loss of micro detail etc… If the planars are well made with good crossover and design…. You will be able to reproduce more of what was actually recorded as micro electric signal in the orignal recording.. IT WILL SOUND MORE REAL.
 
However, for all intents and purposes, most planar loudspeakers are expensive, they also require very expensive amplification and unless you have a lot of money to spend I do not recommend people to go down that path. You’ll run out of “gas” sooner than you would think.
 
There are ways of doing inexpensively, and when I say inexpensively this is compared to the expensive  $$$$ way. You could certainly buy yourself a set of Magneplanar Tympani 1D loudspeakers (which are not the fastest planars but do have good bass- though seem as if the midrange is a bit "blanketed") and pair them with a used Audio Research VT100 MK 2 100 wpc tube amplifier. This amp is very resolving and will help bring out detail- and the tube overshoot will help the slower Tympani 1D diaphram come to life.  Cost $350-1200 for Magneplanar Tympani 1D and  $2000-$2500 for the amp.
 
That will IMHO beat most New  systems costing upwards of  $10,000- $25,000. It will stage better, have good wave launch, more air, but you’ll have to fiddle a lot with speaker placement and angles of the panels.
 
Other than the Tympani  1D (Tympani IV is even better) and Tubes route... I don't know of any inexpensive small Planar routes that don't sacrifice image height, dynamics, bass, sound staging etc. Many team Bryston with Magneplanars which is ok with smaller models...but magic doesn't start until you get a full wave launch afforded by the Tympani... not even with their largest current models. YMMV
 
Wanna go cheaper? About $1000?
 
Just buy Adam Audio A7's (not A7x - the new model does not sound nearly as good) and plug and play... if this is your first step into the high end.. it could be a final step..... you won't feel like you are missing anything....except low bass. But listen nearfield and it is pretty darned good. You can power them with a battery and voltage converter and take them to the beach (mounted on poles (Trust me the beach quasi-anecholic environment is fabulous).. they play in dorm rooms, kitchens, bring them to friends houses with crappy systems for parties,,,,, put them in your car for long trips, hook them up to gaming consoles… jam out with instruments… use them for studio monitors..etc… a good bargain. The smaller Adams are not worth it..and the larger ones are not very good. The Adam Audio S3X-H is good too though. But $$$ I just wish it was a class A/B amped speaker throughout... or just woofers under 150hz for a class D ICE power amp.
 
Under$500? Ouch now you're pushing it. Frankly you are likely better off with good headphones.
 
Used Sound Dynamics RTS-3 $175 + and old Tandberg 3012 integrated amp $200.  Used target 24" stands $120  sand or reclaimed lead shot from a  shooting range. Still fun... really fun. 

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Or perhaps, the women with bad hearing didn't hear predators approaching them while foraging or homemaking, and thus were eaten.
 
You're making too many generalizations and assumptions to come to any good conclusion here - there's so much more to it than what you've brought up.  For example, a number of hunter-gatherer societies hunted not lone animals, but single animals out of packs - mammoth, gazelle, bison, etc.  Division of labor isn't as clear-cut as you make it, either.  Some paleolithic women hunted and men foraged - depending on the social structure of the society and the benefits that sexual division of labor did or did not have for that particular environment.
 
Basically, your logic is flawed, and even worse, you're twisting the facts to fit your foregone (predetermined) conclusion - which in itself has evidence to the contrary!  Modern studies show that females generally have more acute hearing from birth, and the gap in average hearing threshold between females and males actually increases with age.  Not to mention, hearing loss rates are significantly higher in men than in women.
 
 
 
Could you explain to me how you have come to the conclusion that the distortion of tube amplifiers replicates the finer details that are lost with inferior mics?  I'd like an explanation of why this is occurring electrically, and perhaps evidence showing this to be true.  I'm not talking about clipping amps either.
 
 
 
Regarding planar speakers - The benefits regarding transient response are greatly diminished as you go down the frequency spectrum, and the benefits of moving coil speakers increase at the same time (large dynamic range).  Longer frequency waves are less troublesome to reproduce with moving coil designs thanks to lower accelerations needed, although just like any massed object, their response isn't perfect.  As a result, there are servo woofer designs that measure cone acceleration and provide a feedback signal to reproduce both substantial and accurate bass.
 
But anyway, the lower need for quick transient response in the lower frequencies and the demand for large dynamics means that there are lots of successful hybrid designs - Apogee, Carver, Martin Logan, VMPS, my personal favorite Infinity, and others.  Subwoofers are a frequent add-on to pure planars, as well.  You mentioned Adams - another hybrid design, and one I'd like to try myself.
 
Under $500 though - there are tons of excellent speakers, among planar, planar-dynamic hybrids, and dynamic loudspeakers...  You just have to look a little!
 
Within two hours' drive of me, there's a pair of Carver AL-III towers, with a ribbon tweeter/midrange and a 10" woofer for $400.  There's also a pair of Infinity Kappa 7.1 Series II speakers for just $250.  I saw a pair of Magnepan SMGs for $100 a little while ago, and even with money spent on a reglueing kit that's still cheap.  What I'd like to try more than any of those is a nearby $300 pair of VMPS Tower II speakers - which are flat down to 22 Hz!  I'm not a basshead by any means, but my experience with the tight yet powerful bass of big Infinity speakers (Renaissance 90, Kappa 8) makes me not want to settle for any less.
 
For the record I paid $350 for my Kappa 8s.  Sennheiser HD 800, HD 600, Beyerdynamic Tesla T1, DT 880, AKG K701, and other headphones don't even come close to their performance.  My Ren 90s ($600 paid, usually worth $1000-$1500) take it up another notch, and we're just talking about the lower end of the best Infinitys.  Even the RS 5s I inherited from my dad (worth perhaps $150 max) outresolve my HD 600 and DT 880 in the treble range and are on par below that.  I like headphones for other reasons, though.

 

[DaveN]

I would've  agreed before, at least until I got the Smyth Realiser . 

 


+1  

 

[matbhuvi]

Quote:

 
Historically most women were at home raising the children, preparing the food, mending clothes. They might sing to make their own music–and it would be MONO not stereo. Perhaps that's why women are satisfied for the most part with extremely low fidelity sound systems.
 

+1 

For my wife, a youtube video @ 360p in 15" laptop doesn't make a difference with my 100" projector screen @ 1080p resolution. Probably, some are blessed with ignorance.

 

[BlackbeardBen]

After spending four months abroad and having listened to a plethora of new headphones - the HD 800 and T1 headlining what I've heard (on a Beyer A1 amp) - I've come home and given my speakers a long-awaited listen.
 
They're definitely not in an ideal setup right now - I had to move three other pairs of speakers from in front of the right one, and both are about 4" from the wall in a very cluttered 12'x16' room.
 
This is my main system:
 
Sony DVP-NS500V CD/SACD player (replacing an NAD 5325 that died)
Carver C-11 preamp
Carver TFM-15CB amp powering the tweeter, mid, and mid-bass
Adcom GFA-555 amp powering the just the woofers
Infinity Renaissance 90 speakers (reviews here; tech specs & photos here)
 
Total spent on putting this system together: Under $1100, everything except shielded interconnects and 12 Ga speaker cable from Monoprice was bought used.  Less than the cost of either the HD 800 or T1, and that's before you even get to amp'ing them or sources...
 
I just got an Adcom GFS-6 speaker selector today in the mail for all my speaker selecting needs, too.  I'd need two if I wanted to use it for biamped speakers though.  It'll be fun to use and make blind testing relatively easy to try.
 
Anyway, obviously the speakers are in about the worst positioning I could put them in - yet I'm blown away by them.  I've forgotten how good they really are.  Frankly, the HD 800 and T1 (So far as I can remember them, which admittedly isn't a very good way to compare.  I do have my HD 600s, which I've listened to and compared to all parties.) don't even compare.  They're inferior in every way except preference things, like portability, tonal preference, and just plain being speakers vs. headphones.
 
Up and down the entire spectrum, everything is more detailed - in particular, mids and highs sound so real - even sitting so far axis it's a bit unexpected to hear such realism - that it's incredible.  It's kind of like those who talk about the "Sennheiser veil" being removed when trying brighter headphones - except it's removing the veil that the HD 800, T1, DT 880, K701, etc. have...  Each individual sound is so much more precisely located than any of the 'phones I've tried - and of course, being speakers, I prefer the (perhaps arguably) more realistic soundstage (which, by the way, properly set up extends all around you, not just in front).  The sense of depth in the soundstage is unreal.  And by unreal I mean really, really realistic sounding.
 
Perhaps most striking to me after four months of headphones only is how effortless the sound is - granted, I haven't pumped them very loud yet, but at low to moderate volumes, it feels like the speakers aren't even trying - the sound just emanates from them.  In particular - the bass is just "there" - effortless in a way that neither inferior speakers nor any headphones I've heard have provided.
 
I should add that they're incredibly dynamic as well.  That's one of the reasons I like these hybrid planar-dynamic designs: You get your effortless super-fast transient response and "airiness" typical of planar designs, but keep the high dynamic range and monstrous bass response of good dynamic speakers.  The drawback?  They make Magnepans look like Klipschorns in comparison, when we're talking about the absolute need for high-current delivery and low-impedance stability.  There's a reason I'm putting almost 1000 Watts RMS (they would gladly take double or triple that) into the Ren 90s - and the dynamic capability of the amps (especially the Adcom) is much, much higher than that thanks to beefy power caps.  Thankfully, Adcoms and Carvers cost peanuts these days.  There are plenty of people who have spent 20x more than me amp'ing these speakers - I don't have that kind of money.
 
Anyway, I hope my experience with coming back to speakers after a four month hiatus (a six month separation is coming up in less than a week, although I'm going to take some bookshelf speakers with me this time) adds to the discussion and collective experiences here.

 

[Golden Ears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackbeardBen /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
REPLIES IN CAPS OUT OF PURE LAZINESS.
 
Or perhaps, the women with bad hearing didn't hear predators approaching them while foraging or homemaking, and thus were eaten.
 
TRUE.....LOL  CLEAN UP THE GENE POOL.
 
You're making too many generalizations and assumptions to come to any good conclusion here -
 
CERTAINLY YOU DIDN'T TAKE ME SERIOUSLY. THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO EVERYTHING.
 
there's so much more to it than what you've brought up.  For example, a number of hunter-gatherer societies hunted not lone animals, but single animals out of packs - mammoth, gazelle, bison, etc.  Division of labor isn't as clear-cut as you make it, either.  Some paleolithic women hunted and men foraged - depending on the social structure of the society and the benefits that sexual division of labor did or did not have for that particular environment.
 
Basically, your logic is flawed, and even worse, you're twisting the facts to fit your foregone (predetermined) conclusion - which in itself has evidence to the contrary!  Modern studies show that females generally have more acute hearing from birth, and the gap in average hearing threshold between females and males actually increases with age.  Not to mention, hearing loss rates are significantly higher in men than in women.
 
ALL TRUE...
 
 
 
Could you explain to me how you have come to the conclusion that the distortion of tube amplifiers replicates the finer details that are lost with inferior mics?  I'd like an explanation of why this is occurring electrically, and perhaps evidence showing this to be true.  I'm not talking about clipping amps either.
 
IT IS NOT SO UCH INFERIOR MICS AS IT IS LOW RESOLUTION DYNAMIC LOUDSPEAKERS. TUBES EUPHONIC DISTORTIONS HELP THEM SOUND SMOOTHER, WARMER, FILLING IN THE GAPS.
 
 
 
Regarding planar speakers - The benefits regarding transient response are greatly diminished as you go down the frequency spectrum, and the benefits of moving coil speakers increase at the same time (large dynamic range).  Longer frequency waves are less troublesome to reproduce with moving coil designs thanks to lower accelerations needed, although just like any massed object, their response isn't perfect.  As a result, there are servo woofer designs that measure cone acceleration and provide a feedback signal to reproduce both substantial and accurate bass.
 
I THINK BELOW 200hz YOU HAD BETTER BE THINKING A DYNAMIC WOOFER ANYHOW...LIKE MY INFINITY RS1B'S. THOSE WOOFERS BTW LEAVE A LOT TO BE DESIRED... I USED ENTEC SW-1 SERVO CONTROLLED 10 INCH WOOFERS WITH THEM WHICH HAD MY HF PANELS CROSSING OVER AT 140HZ TO THE INFINITY WOOFERS AND THE ENTECS TAKING OVER AT 100HZ AND DOWN. SO LESS THAN AN OCTAVE WAS DEDICATED TO A NON SERVO CONTROLLED WOOFER AFTER THE HF CROSSOVER POINT.
 
But anyway, the lower need for quick transient response in the lower frequencies and the demand for large dynamics means that there are lots of successful hybrid designs - Apogee, Carver, Martin Logan, VMPS, my personal favorite Infinity, and others.  Subwoofers are a frequent add-on to pure planars, as well.  You mentioned Adams - another hybrid design, and one I'd like to try myself.
 
THE ADAMS ARE NOT WITHOUT FLAWS-- THERE ARE BETTER OPTIONS BUT MORE COMPLICATED.. YOU SAVE ON INTERCONNECTS AND AMPS AND GUITAR CENTER WILL FINANCE THEM VERY CHEAPLY. I WISH OTHERS ON HEADFI THINKING ABOUT THEIR FIRST SPEAKERS..JUST BOUGHT THE ADAMS AND AVOIDED THE 30+ YEAR SEARCH I HAVE HAD TO ENDURE... IT IS A COLLOSSAL WASTE OF TIME AND THINKING AND $$$ RESOURCES... AND IT'S AN OBSESSION.
 
Under $500 though - there are tons of excellent speakers, among planar, planar-dynamic hybrids, and dynamic loudspeakers...  You just have to look a little!
 
Within two hours' drive of me, there's a pair of Carver AL-III towers, with a ribbon tweeter/midrange and a 10" woofer for $400.  There's also a pair of Infinity Kappa 7.1 Series II speakers for just $250.  I saw a pair of Magnepan SMGs for $100 a little while ago, and even with money spent on a reglueing kit that's still cheap.  What I'd like to try more than any of those is a nearby $300 pair of VMPS Tower II speakers - which are flat down to 22 Hz!  I'm not a basshead by any means, but my experience with the tight yet powerful bass of big Infinity speakers (Renaissance 90, Kappa 8) makes me not want to settle for any less.
 
For the record I paid $350 for my Kappa 8s.  Sennheiser HD 800, HD 600, Beyerdynamic Tesla T1, DT 880, AKG K701, and other headphones don't even come close to their performance.  My Ren 90s ($600 paid, usually worth $1000-$1500) take it up another notch, and we're just talking about the lower end of the best Infinitys.  Even the RS 5s I inherited from my dad (worth perhaps $150 max) outresolve my HD 600 and DT 880 in the treble range and are on par below that.  I like headphones for other reasons, though.
 
ALL GOOD CHOICES.. THERE ARE TOO MANY TO LIST UNDER $500.

 

[yifu]

Speakers are always better. But headphones and IEMs buy you portability and more quality for price. Plus you dont have to do room treatments, speaker positioning and you dont have to disturb your neighbours.

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Golden Ears, it's awfully hard to tell who and what to take seriously these days... 
 
Another one unsatisfied with the low bass from the RS 1B, I see.  I wish I had the chance to say that...  My Renaissance 90s are easily the best speaker I've had the privilege of listening to, so it's hard for me to compare.  To my ears the 90s sound near-perfect across the whole bass spectrum, which is probably the case for nearly everyone with the best they've heard.

 

[Currawong]

GoldenEars: My late father would have been amused by your thoughts about human development, but that's too complex to explain (and of course too contentious). I hope to be able to put online some of what he has said about science in the future, which you might enjoy.
 
I'm glad at least one of my blog posts has generated interest and as well given me some things to think about that I didn't before.

 

[jax]

Great thread - thanks to Golden Ears and Currawong.  As a reluctant head-fier, as it were, I strongly relate to Golden Ears original post.  I'd only edit that the raison d'etre for headphones in my world has absolutely nothing to do with portability and everything to do with privacy (which has been touched on since the OP).  Given the choice (wife not home) I will always choose speakers over headphones as that experience engages me more completely as well as being a far more realistic presentation of the musical event.  One statement that particularly resonates, and I'm paraphrasing, is that I have not listened to any headphone rig that completely suspends my disbelief that I am listening to headphones.  In the absence of being able to 'feel' the music in addition to hearing it, the illusion is entirely lost on me.  I started out young as well, though at the ripe old age of 17, but started with speakers and have been immersed in that world for over thirty years now.  It's not that I don't enjoy music via headphones, I do or I wouldn't be here posting.  My experience of music is much fuller and I tend to loose myself more readily when listening to speakers.  When I do loose myself in headphone listening it is more of a detachment from my body, and remains all in the head.  With speakers the experience is an immersion that is all-inclusive.  That's the best I can do at an explanation for the moment.