Does anyone besides me hate the term "cans'?

Well, first off, there isn't an apostrophe in there - it isn't a can possessing some other object, it's a collection of objects which are individually a can (hence, cans). Also, I'm fairly sure it's a British English slang that's crossed the pond. Finally, I don't see it as a problem either way - cans, headphones, stereophones, earspeakers, I don't really care what you call it, as long as it makes good vibrations.

It's probably the LOLcat effect... "I can haz cans"

Google "audio cans" gives 15 million hits. Unfortunately, anyone who prefers sensible names for things is highly outnumbered.

What says its "sensible" - remember that outside of structured orthography, there is no objective "right answer" to language.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fubar3 

It's probably the LOLcat effect... "I can haz cans"

 

Google "audio cans" gives 15 million hits. Unfortunately, anyone who prefers sensible names for things is highly outnumbered.

I like "cans" better than "phones"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magick Man 
but, but, it's my favorite slang word for headphones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WNBC 

I like "cans" better than "phones"

QFT.  I actually don't like it, but you might not know that because I do refer to them as "cans" often.  I first picked it up as a pro audio term, and it is as legitimate a term to me as "b•lls to the wall" and "t•ts up" are legitimate, necessary, and widely understood engineering terms.

And on top of that, "phones" in this very modern day and age of people actually plugging these things into their telephones really makes it seem like the wrong word to use.

The terms is short--one syllable and only 3 or 4 letters.  Therefore, it's convenient.

However, it's not very intuitive with regard to what it means.  ...except when I think of what was on the end of the strings we ran between the second stories of our homes when I was a kid in the early 60's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by obobskivich 

Well, first off, there isn't an apostrophe in there - it isn't a can possessing some other object, it's a collection of objects which are individually a can (hence, cans). Also, I'm fairly sure it's a British English slang that's crossed the pond. Finally, I don't see it as a problem either way - cans, headphones, stereophones, earspeakers, I don't really care what you call it, as long as it makes good vibrations.

 

 

Yes, it is.

English English slang.
 

:-)

Aren't cans another term for big, bouncy breasts?

I always knew I liked the word cans and it wasn't because of headphones 
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesfonda 

Aren't cans another term for big, bouncy breasts?

I read that it is also a Jazz slang for headphones. I understand when someone does not like to use the term. Sometimes we love headphones so much, one way to respect and appreciate the headphones is to call and address properly as headphones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WNBC 

I like "cans" better than "phones"

 

 

I, too, agree with this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by obobskivich 

What says its "sensible" - remember that outside of structured orthography, there is no objective "right answer" to language.

 

There IS an apostrophe there; "it's."

I like the term "cans" I also like "phones" sometimes the word headphones doesn't fit the context as well.

I don't use the word cans to ever describe headphones but I have no problem with others using cans.