Ever wondered why music sounds so different on headphones compared to loudspeakers?

[dalethorn]

I am one of the people who does most of his high-end investing and listening on headphone setups. For me there are two reasons: Noise, and Cost. Even though I live in a big Texas-sized house, I don't have a space where I can listen to music at realistic levels without disturbing my family. Also, I aspire to a high-end setup. To achieve that with a loudspeaker-based system would take many 10s of kilobucks, far more than I could afford at this point. If you look below at my system topology, I've assembled a fairly high-end headphone setup, at a fraction of the cost. Yes, in an ideal world, with cost not a concern, and in a well-tuned space, I do think the speaker listening environment is more satisfying. However, with those constraints in place, for many people the headphone setup can yield a far more high-end and satisfying experience.

 

I'm mostly in agreement here. Once upon a time, I took the Henry Kloss challenge of "Hoffman's Iron Law" of bass reproduction to heart, and got the Advents (very highly regarded by Stereophile) and a gutsy Crown amp to drive them. I blocked up a large opening in my living room, whose lowest resonance was around 29 hz, and the bass response from London CS6609 (Zarathustra/Mehta/L.A. Phil) was then quite good - amazing given the size of the Advents. Then I had a listen to an HQD speaker system in Cleveland, where the Hartley 24 inch woofers provided the low end. Wow! So what I looked for for some time after that was to obtain a suitable listening room, and speakers that would deliver more impact than the Advents without breaking up, but maybe half or 2/3 the size of the HQD system. In today's money, the estimate I came up with would be about $250 thousand, with half of that going to the room and the other half the speakers. Not for "sound effects" BTW, but for flat bass with low distortion on many classical recordings, down to about 30 hz.

[Kal Rubinson]

As a Stereophile editor and/or writer, you would be expected to know the answer better than I, and after all I'm just a guy who has reviewed 160 or so headphones purchased with my own money.

Why would you think that I would know more about headphones than someone who has reviewed so many headphones when I am not particularly interest in them?

 

But I can offer you a reality check. If you believe that major recordings of refined music today are ignoring the ever-growing audiophile headphone market in favor of the shrinking number of audiophile speaker installations, then I'd say that doesn't pass the credibility litmus test.

 

I have spoken with many producers of high quality classical music and the issue of headphone listening simply never comes up. That is not to say that their listeners do not use headphones. It is just that it never came up in any discussion. Every discussion has presumed the context of loudspeaker listening.

 

As a result, I do not know you mean by "major recordings of refined music" nor what their producers are doing to support the, admittedly, growing market of headphone listeners.

 

If I do have to do the research to prove how and where recording/mixing engineers are making sure that headphone spatial cues are included in recordings that are also expected to play on speakers, then I'll do it on a bet for money, to make it worthwhile.

You were asserting that something is being done and I am simply asking you for proof. My concern is how they may be including "headphone spatial cues" and possibly mucking up the sound for others.

[dalethorn]

I have spoken with many producers of high quality classical music and the issue of headphone listening simply never comes up. That is not to say that their listeners do not use headphones. It is just that it never came up in any discussion. Every discussion has presumed the context of loudspeaker listening. As a result, I do not know you mean by "major recordings of refined music" nor what their producers are doing to support the, admittedly, growing market of headphone listeners. You were asserting that something is being done and I am simply asking you for proof.

 

I'm not required to supply "proof" just because I assert something. However, if you're challenging me to waste my time proving something to you, because you demand it, then you need to ante up.

[Kal Rubinson]

I'm not required to supply "proof" just because I assert something. However, if you're challenging me to waste my time proving something to you, because you demand it, then you need to ante up.

Never mind. I'll ignore it.

[dalethorn]

Never mind. I'll ignore it.

 

Here's a quote from Recording.org:

"Nobody that I know listens to music while sitting facing two speakers properly positioned for stereo. They listen in cars, at work from a lousy mono radio source, or (guessing 75% of the time) on headphones. In my successful recording career, these are the people I'm mixing for."

 

I'm finding tons more - reading some right now. But of course, you don't believe these exist. Like I said, make it a challenge and I'll write you a book.

[Kal Rubinson]

Here's a quote from Recording.org:

"Nobody that I know listens to music while sitting facing two speakers properly positioned for stereo. They listen in cars, at work from a lousy mono radio source, or (guessing 75% of the time) on headphones. In my successful recording career, these are the people I'm mixing for."

Ah. A point. Still, I don't know what he records and what he does to the music to achieve his goal.

[dalethorn]

Ah. A point. Still, I don't know what he records and what he does to the music to achieve his goal.

 

One of the most common topics that I find are the 'why' that big studios and even on-location recordists use both speakers and headphones, during recording perhaps, but especially in mixing. It's because of phase cancellation and similar things, which can bite you both directions. Certain things that show up in a mix on headphones can disappear or nearly so on the monitors, and vice-versa.

[flak]

One of the most common topics that I find are the 'why' that big studios and even on-location recordists use both speakers and headphones, during recording perhaps, but especially in mixing. It's because of phase cancellation and similar things, which can bite you both directions. Certain things that show up in a mix on headphones can disappear or nearly so on the monitors, and vice-versa.

 

Hi Dalethorn,

 

I think that you answered yourself here... as I previously mentioned one cannot optimize for both.

The differences are measurable (and measured) facts and not opinions, they are explained in details in the document that I linked in my first post.

 

Flavio

[dalethorn]

Hi Dalethorn, I think that you answered yourself here... as I previously mentioned one cannot optimize for both. The differences are measurable (and measured) facts and not opinions, they are explained in details in the document that I linked in my first post. Flavio

 

You're completely wrong, and the proof, besides the many examples detailed on the Web, is the actual listener base. Your argument wants to ignore reality. The record companies may be slow-moving, but they record for their actual audiences, mostly headphones.

 

Now, specifically, the argument that you cannot perfectly optimize for both, is a strawman : Once the recording is made, the engineers listen on both loudspeakers and headphones, and something that's a problem on one of those gets tweaked until it passes on both. I can do that myself.

 

As Stereophile and others have noted, both the loudspeaker AND headphone image are a fiction. Therein lies the path to success for both.

[flak]

You're completely wrong...

 

Never mind, I'll follow Kal Rubinson's example (by the way I agree with him)... I said what I had to say with documented facts (I don't see you disputing a single line or word of that document) but I leave you the last word 'cause forumers can judge by themselves

 

Flavio

[Synfreak]

Recording / mixing / mastering audio for headphone use can't be done without knowing the listeners HRTF.

 

To get as close as possible is to mix on - and for -speakers, and add something like the Smyth Realizer with carefully made measurments of your HRTF.

[james45974]

Here's a quote from Recording.org:

"Nobody that I know listens to music while sitting facing two speakers properly positioned for stereo. They listen in cars, at work from a lousy mono radio source, or (guessing 75% of the time) on headphones. In my successful recording career, these are the people I'm mixing for."

 

I'm finding tons more - reading some right now. But of course, you don't believe these exist. Like I said, make it a challenge and I'll write you a book.

 

If recordings are being mastered for "guessing 75% of the time" for headphones, why do we have the loudness wars? Listening on headphones would seem to negate the need for mastering for loudness.

[dalethorn]

Never mind, I'll follow Kal Rubinson's example (by the way I agree with him)... I said what I had to say with documented facts (I don't see you disputing a single line or word of that document) but I leave you the last word 'cause forumers can judge by themselves. Flavio

 

My philosophy is to say I agree with what you said, not "I agree with you." Do you get the difference?

[dalethorn]

Recording / mixing / mastering audio for headphone use can't be done without knowing the listeners HRTF. To get as close as possible is to mix on - and for -speakers, and add something like the Smyth Realizer with carefully made measurments of your HRTF.

 

At the moment I'm listening to E. Power Biggs on the Flentrop Organ circa 1960-61, remastered by Sony in the 90's I think. I'm using a $129 Beats EP, equalized neutral. The sound is essentially the same as in the Cleveland church where I attended live concerts. So your technical explanation is failing to interrupt the reality of my experience.

[dalethorn]

If recordings are being mastered for "guessing 75% of the time" for headphones, why do we have the loudness wars? Listening on headphones would seem to negate the need for mastering for loudness.

 

Mastering for loudness is described exactly in the quote I posted. Which, in case you missed it, is NOT for the "living room speaker experience". The majority of headphone users deal with the crap the same way as the majority of speaker users. Workaround. For headphones, it's the 'Beats' method of jacking up the bass. For audiophiles, it's buying better recordings.

[dalethorn]

Here are a couple of additional thoughts for those who aren't extremely familiar with good headphones. Most premium headphones have deficiencies of one type or another. The ideal sound, in my opinion, is a natural sound. With the best recordings, your headphones should sound pretty much like live music. Assuming you're in a good listening location for live music. The argument for natural is not about your individual hearing or preferences, or HRTF, it's about what you hear with headphone on or off - both sounding natural.

 

So a good beginning is to correct any large deviations from flat with a good parametric equalizer, if necessary. The next step is to correct any unnatural sounds when playing good recordings. It can be tedious, but with time and patience, you'll discover not only a natural reproduction, but the soundstage will become much better, realistic even.

 

That last part about soundstage might seem counter-intuitive in relation to EQ, but 100-plus headphones later I have all the confirmation I'd ever need.

 

The last thought is: When you see with your eyes, you are literally seeing upside down. The brain fixes that in an amazing way. It also fixes anomalies in the playback on speakers or headphones, assuming that you're not already listening with Klipschorns sitting in the corners of a large room, properly installed.

[semente]

Stereophile had a great article on why vinyl sounds different, and why a lot of people prefer it. The gist of it is that the stylus does something that neither digital nor analog tape playback does - the stylus generates its own current by its physical action in the record grooves, and then the amps amplify that sound. Tape and digital players have to construct that voltage from magnetism or bytes of computer data. That is bound to sound different.

 

I guess current is another word for distortion.

Some like it, but not me.

 

R

[semente]

Kind of a non-sequitur right out of the gate. Ever hear of binaural recording? It's not merely natural sounding, it's superior to any speaker reproduction by design. So then the question becomes, "how much of that is engineered into today's audiophile recordings?", not whether it's built in.

I don't think it can ever sound natural.

Headphones reproduce recorded sound in the tiny space inside the can.

I don't like them.

 

R

[mansr]

I guess current is another word for distortion.

Some like it, but not me.

 

The quote is utter nonsense. Both vinyl and tape generate a current through magnetic induction. The only difference is the shape of the magnets and coils.

[VenturaRV]

Although I can happily listen to music on headphones, I have never enjoyed the experience much and for me it is no substitute for listening with speakers. With speakers I feel like I am listening to music, a performance or whatever. With headphones, with any recording, it feels artificial, I simply have this sensation that the music is in my head, this limits my enjoyment, I just don't like it much!

 

 

Is it just me?

No, it's not just you.

Everery one knows that "inside the head" effect phones produce, and it is quite artificial, indeed.

But, and this is controversial too, headphones can allow a more focused listening than loudspeakers.

Another point: to obtain the same tonal response a pair of, say, 100$ can deliver with loudspeakers (supposing a perfect room acoustics) you must pay, at least, one magnitude order more money.

"Button" phones, in other matter, are perfect for binaural recordings. I mean "good" earbuds than can easily reach the 3,000$ price point tag.

But "binaural" and "stereo" are different techniques, being binaural ideal for headphones (well, button type), and stereo for loudspeakers and just acceptable for headphones. In what spatialition is concerned, the HRTFs (Head Related Transfer Functions) must be taken intio account, and this is a very complex and still no well dominated matter.

Most recordings are monitorized with loudspeakers, and phones are used to find minute failures in the sessions.

 

Sent from my LG-E430 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[Kal Rubinson]

"Button" phones, in other matter, are perfect for binaural recordings.

Sure but there is no significant repertoire on binaural recordings.

[dalethorn]

I guess current is another word for distortion.

Some like it, but not me. R

 

You're saying that the entire current generated by a stylus is mere distortion?

[dalethorn]

I don't think it can ever sound natural.

Headphones reproduce recorded sound in the tiny space inside the can.

I don't like them. R

 

You're saying that headphones selling for $4000 to $55000 are just bad purchases by ignorant folks? I don't think you've thought that through before posting here.

[Priaptor]

No, it's not just you.

Everery one knows that "inside the head" effect phones produce, and it is quite artificial, indeed.

But, and this is controversial too, headphones can allow a more focused listening than loudspeakers.

Another point: to obtain the same tonal response a pair of, say, 100$ can deliver with loudspeakers (supposing a perfect room acoustics) you must pay, at least, one magnitude order more money.

"Button" phones, in other matter, are perfect for binaural recordings. I mean "good" earbuds than can easily reach the 3,000$ price point tag.

But "binaural" and "stereo" are different techniques, being binaural ideal for headphones (well, button type), and stereo for loudspeakers and just acceptable for headphones. In what spatialition is concerned, the HRTFs (Head Related Transfer Functions) must be taken intio account, and this is a very complex and still no well dominated matter.

Most recordings are monitorized with loudspeakers, and phones are used to find minute failures in the sessions.

 

Sent from my LG-E430 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

I have to say I am new to the headphone game and have always been a speaker big system person and also never liked my headphone experiences in the past.

 

I got into headphones a couple of years ago with a HUGO and LCD-X and have graduated to a T&A DAC DSD + Cavalli Liquid Gold and HD800S and believe any doubts one may have regarding realism and imaging and out of head experience would be allayed if they heard this system.

 

To be honest there are times I just prefer lounging with my cans instead of my main system.

 

I have become a believer in headphones.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[dalethorn]

No, it's not just you.

Everery one knows that "inside the head" effect phones produce, and it is quite artificial, indeed.

But, and this is controversial too, headphones can allow a more focused listening than loudspeakers.

Another point: to obtain the same tonal response a pair of, say, 100$ can deliver with loudspeakers (supposing a perfect room acoustics) you must pay, at least, one magnitude order more money.

"Button" phones, in other matter, are perfect for binaural recordings. I mean "good" earbuds than can easily reach the 3,000$ price point tag.

But "binaural" and "stereo" are different techniques, being binaural ideal for headphones (well, button type), and stereo for loudspeakers and just acceptable for headphones. In what spatialition is concerned, the HRTFs (Head Related Transfer Functions) must be taken intio account, and this is a very complex and still no well dominated matter.

Most recordings are monitorized with loudspeakers, and phones are used to find minute failures in the sessions.

Sent from my LG-E430 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

None of this is relevant to headphone listening. This reads like the 3 blind men describing an elephant, one holding the tail, another the trunk, and another an ear.

 

When I listen to a symphony or large pipe organ on my headphone, it sounds quite similar to being there in person with my eyes closed. I recommend some experience in the headphone community, learning from others who are better informed.