Differences between use of "Forward" and "Intimate"

I tend to use "forward" as partly bright, and partly agressive and quick on transients, possibly loud and dynamic. It could be a bad thing, taken too far.

"Intimate" is more positive, in my opinion. Basically, as described above, up-close and personal. Ohhh, yeah...

Interesting how people use words and the various meanings they can have...

For me forward would indicate the stage is further away. Sitting in row fifteen instead of right on stage. This could be positive or negative, does the stage width expand along with the added depth, or does it narrow out, making you feel as if you're in a tunnel?

I guess I could also see it meaning the sound is pushed closer to you, depends on which way forward one means.

HiWire, I don't see forward as having anything to do with brightness, for me its all about positioning.

I try to use a couple descriptors to clarify, instead of just one. I don't find a single word very useful, because even with ten descriptors, it's still so subjective.

As to intimacy, this would have a much clearer meaning to me. There is a certain something special about a small club or bar atmosphere. The room is small, the sound is big, and you are very much "right there". Someone whispering directly to you paints a great picture... you would feel that close.

The catch with using intimate as a descriptor, is that I can't see it fitting of an amplifier or headphones. Rather its a term far better suited to the particular recording. The phones and/or amp could certainly help in reproducing the ambience and environment of a great live recording, but I think the magic has to be there to begin with... its not something equipment can provide you.


I try my best to describe what I hear, or differences that I hear, but I really try not to worry about it too much. I've done cigar reviews, whiskey reviews, and other things too... but it's all such a YMMV type of thing, based on personal opinions and preferrences... You and I could have a completely different idea on what coffee should taste like, so who is right?

I personally find "forward" and "intimate" two opposite signatures in headphones. Forward would obviously mean aggressive, loud highs or mids, punchy bass, and sometimes an obnoxiously grating sound. Intimate, on the other hand, means a more refined, calmer sound with slightly recessed highs and bass. The HD5x5's, Grados, and SAx000 would be examples of forward phones, while the K501 and E4 would be rather intimate. The HD580/600/650 would be somewhere in between.

I don't think forwardness or intimacy has anything to do with either the soundstage, bright/dark or warm/cold. Intimate cans are nice and relaxing to listen to, but there needs to be some level of forwardness to make the sound musical and give it emotion.

On a side note, does anyone ever wonder why we don't just refer to the HD580/600/650 as the "HD6 series?" I mean, the HD580 are practically HD600's, and it's widely accepted that those three cans belong in the same family. It would just be much easier to type...

For me it is the same phenomenon (both indicate "close by and direct"), the difference being "intimate" is friendly, seducive and "forward" is pushy, agressive.

I use "forward" to describe one part vs. "intimate" which I would use to include all instruments. For example the ES2's and PS-1's have a forward vocal presentation and the non "M" Hornet has a intimate presentation.

double post

When I think of intimate, I think "Black" between notes. I think everything else quiets down when one thing if focused as if everything is playing just for you. Too much reverb or congestion kills intimacy. Example of an intimate recording would be patricia barbers companion. It sounds like youre there. I think Intimate and immediate are about the same but intimate is just a more subjective word because I think of it as immediacy combined with musicality (Ones pleasure of listening to the immediacy makes it intimate). Detail plays a part in intimacy.

When I think forward, it just means more "in your face" and closer but it doesnt mean its more focused though. Ex. the vocals might sound forward but if everything else is a blur, it wont sound intimate to me because the soundstage is not coherent enough to sound like everything is playing in one room. Something can sound forward but still lack life and immediacy ex. old dry recordings that lack the balance and extension of great ones.

I took my understanding of the "HD595 is forward while HDxx0 is laid back" dogma from descriptions like this quote from HeadRoom's description of the 595 as compared to the xx0's:

The one common criticism of this family of cans is a “polite” sound, a sound that is perhaps a few rows too far back in the audience. Well, hallelujah!... the HD595 has just given you killer front row seats.

Yet this is not at all how I perceive my 580 vs. my 595. Like blessingx, I find that to me the xx0's sound like I am very, very close to the performers, while the 595 gives me more of an arm's-length (actually considerably further away) impression.

I thought perhaps this was just me, until blessingx and I had this conversation. Conventional wisdom is a very strong force on Head-Fi and I'd grown weary of the apparent futility of challenging it (see my many "ER-6i >> E4" posts) so I never bothered to bring it up with anyone before.

But now I'm curious. Are there any more members of Team HD595 is less forward ?

because of their differing frequency responses and maybe directionality because of the angled drivers in the 595, some instruments sound more forward on the 580 and some more forward on the 595. Its dependent I think on which frequency the instrument is playing the most of. They are not like grados where everything is forward because of the flat soundstage. Which is more intimate? I won't argue because like I said above, intimacy is partly subjective and dependent on what gives you goosebumps. The 595s are more immediate though to these ears. I can hear the raw detail of the focused instruments more. From my memory of the 580, it wasn't as focused.

Focus makes things intimate for me. The 580s are more diffused and could be a more intimate thing depending on the listener.

There are only two contexts in which I use the word "forward," the first one referring to the spike over the upper mids, the second referring to presentation of space - as in, up-close and personal, as opposed to distant.

"Intimate" is a far trickier word because not only is it subjective, it's almost impossible to separate it as it applies to headphones versus the music itself.

So would you agree with post #8? If you understand my run on writing

Er...a few things I dissent with:

>> When I think of intimate, I think "Black" between notes.

Not sure what you mean here, but blackness between notes usually refers to attack and decay.

>> I think everything else quiets down when one thing if focused as if everything is playing just for you.

What about ensemble recordings, are you saying those can't be intimate?

>> Too much reverb or congestion kills intimacy.

Not sure I agree with that, I have a few CDs with a good amount of reverb, echo, or concurrent layers that are definitely intimate-sounding music.

>> It sounds like youre there.

Now this I can agree with. Intimate absolutely should mean it sounds like you're there.

>> Detail plays a part in intimacy.

Uh...not sure I understand this. What about vintage 60s/70s music?

>> When I think forward, it just means more "in your face" and closer but it doesnt mean its more focused though.

Define "focused."

Not that I meant to pick apart your post, I only replied in parts like that because you asked.

First I'll Say my definition of focused is detailed/defined. It is clear where the instrument is in the stage because of its clearly recorded natural reverb (including the direct sound, first reflections and all the natural bounces).

Some old 50s 60s recordings are too dry and dead with artificial reverb which is made to simulate a real acoustic space which could be forward but not intimate ( not to me anyway).

Black between notes: Attack and decay sure plays a part in it but what I mean by this is that since there is no lag between the notes because of this perfect attack and decay that all the coughs, recording anomalies, strings just being touched could be heard in between all the complexities of the loud music. As if no haze exists that can mask the smallest of details present in the recording.

About your question if Ensemble recordings can be intimate. Of course they can. As long as they sound like they are all playing in a real and natural space. Of course playing in a jazz club with good acoustics will still be more intimate to me than if they played in a big concert hall. This intimacy comes from being closer(more forward) to the performers combined with the clarity and focus coming from a smaller venue. A rough Ex. 15 feet away from the musicians in a jazz club will probably sound more intimate than being 10 feet away in a concert hall because even if the musicians are closer to you in that hall, they will still sound more diffused and less focused because of that venues acoustic properties.

About too much congestion killing intimacy, hmm thats just my subjective side saying thats what makes me feel that the music is intimate just like your subjective side might say that even a bad recording can be intimate as long as the song(music itself) gives you goosebumps.

Hmm, hope you get what I mean with my rough english