[gunwale]

let me help you. here is what I get in the end from all your posts:
some headphones have good enough fidelity for subjective simulations.

if that is indeed your very simple point(bolded part of your post), let's stop with the fishing trips and trying to win the internet. then you'll see that many people will agree, as in some respects it's easier to control a headphone than speakers. headphones do need customization for a given listener, so good headphones have good soundstage is still very much BS and IMO you should admit that much for the sake of the discussion. but past that, headphones can for example offer lower distortions than most speakers, and we don't have to treat a room. so a headphone can be a good tool for sound reproduction(as long as we're not asking for really high fidelity).
you see now we're talking about real stuff, the headphone is only a transducer and fidelity is the important and objective aspect. people can understand and discuss that. no forcing a strange concept of soundstage onto the headphone itself for no reason, no reinventing the recording industry just to be right about something. instead now it's a matter of fidelity for a playback component. a simple and rational conversation. ^_^

my theory may be BS but the fact that better headphone actually give the listen better soundstage and imaging is true.

headphone and iem have more science than just the transducer or driver. sealing is important and nowadays there are more drivers, different drivers positioning and etc.

calling it BS is like telling everyone who reviewed headphone and iem BS.

one of the highest fidelity speakers are like the electrostatics or hybrid like martin logan? or maybe some dolby atmos setup?

i am no speaker experts so can you give me some example of some real hifi speakers?

i think for every hifi speakers there should be an equivalent in a form of headphone.

honestly do you guys even listen to both speakers and headphone/iem or you guys are just speaking theoritically?

whatever i say is based on my own experience and not repeating what BS other people said.

try using a cheap earbud and compare against a 200 dollars good sealing iem or a cheap 100 dollars headphone can tell me you hear no difference in imaging of the recording of any album.

 

[pinnahertz]

if you read my screenshots it says that the smyth realizer can replicate environment and it can place up till 16 speakers around the virtual environment.

I didn't need to read them again, and it still doesn't matter. It's irrelevant.

it may be slap in the face obvious but are you certain that every single person on earth have the same kind of superhuman hearing like you?

I've never claimed to be superhuman, or have superhuman hearing. I'm confident that the vast majority of people on earth could hear the difference between open back headphones and speakers.

how confident are you to score a perfect score?

I'm confident that I'm confident. Perfect? I don't know, but I'm sure I could hit enough statistical trials to prove it's clearly audible. Of course, it's impossible to do that because all tests of that kind would be fully sighted and biased anyway. Dumb test.

i dont think i can ever meet u up in person but i am looking forward to perform the experiment on you.

Done it. I don't need to do it again. But I'm not letting you experiment on me, that's for sure!

 

[pinnahertz]

phone speakers are not mono. there are many phone with stereo speakers.

Some phones have two speakers, but they're so close together they can be considered mono. Is that a new perspective we're going to argue about now?

read the next paragraph. it says that people should mix with speakers or speakers users and headphone for headphone users since nowadays there are more and more headphone users.

NEVER going to happen. We've had portable headphone listening since 1979, and in proliferation for 30 years. If that's not enough to stimulate the industry to release a special headphone mix, then it's never going to happen.

i never once said that i can hear the sound stage that is mixed specially for speakers.

If you hear a "soundstage" at all in any recording, it's been mixed for speakers.

My example is based on an auditorium recording of agt on youtube which i believe that is has a more neutral profile which doesnt specifically bias to speakers or headphone.

It doesn't matter, that doesn't make your point.

 

[gunwale]

I didn't need to read them again, and it still doesn't matter. It's irrelevant.
I've never claimed to be superhuman, or have superhuman hearing. I'm confident that the vast majority of people on earth could hear the difference between open back headphones and speakers.
I'm confident that I'm confident. Perfect? I don't know, but I'm sure I could hit enough statistical trials to prove it's clearly audible. Of course, it's impossible to do that because all tests of that kind would be fully sighted and biased anyway. Dumb test.

Done it. I don't need to do it again. But I'm not letting you experiment on me, that's for sure!

well now you dont sound confident at all. what happen to slap in the face obvious?

so isnt slap in the face obvious should even more than just a border line satistically proven?

 

[gunwale]

Some phones have two speakers, but they're so close together they can be considered mono. Is that a new perspective we're going to argue about now?
NEVER going to happen. We've had portable headphone listening since 1979, and in proliferation for 30 years. If that's not enough to stimulate the industry to release a special headphone mix, then it's never going to happen.
If you hear a "soundstage" at all in any recording, it's been mixed for speakers.

It doesn't matter, that doesn't make your point.

1979? now is 2017 and we have smyth. you are just ignoring technology or science is not technology?

 

[pinnahertz]

my theory may be BS but the fact that better headphone actually give the listen better soundstage and imaging is true.

I'll cast my vote for BS.

headphone and iem have more science than just the transducer or driver. sealing is important and nowadays there are more drivers, different drivers positioning and etc.

Yeah...so?

calling it BS is like telling everyone who reviewed headphone and iem BS.

I'm calling your "theory" BS. Reviewers can express any opinion they like.

one of the highest fidelity speakers are like the electrostatics or hybrid like martin logan? or maybe some dolby atmos setup?

i am no speaker experts so can you give me some example of some real hifi speakers?

I see no point in further straying off topic.

i think for every hifi speakers there should be an equivalent in a form of headphone.

But there can't be! The two are entirely dissimilar. There can't be an equivalent of dissimilar things.

honestly do you guys even listen to both speakers and headphone/iem or you guys are just speaking theoritically?

I listen to speakers, headphones, and IEMs every single day. But, I've also listened to speakers and headphones nearly every day for the last 55 years. I'll still bet that means I "don't know what I'm talking about".

whatever i say is based on my own experience and not repeating what BS other people said.

Your experience is far too limited, and you have excessively repeated the marketing hype from Smyth.

try using a cheap earbud and compare against a 200 dollars good sealing iem or a cheap 100 dollars headphone can tell me you hear no difference in imaging of the recording of any album.

I have not found a strong correlation between price and performance. I've listened to most of the prominent high-end headphones, and have been largely disappointed. There are a few good ones, but I've never found a set of headphones with performance that justifies a price over $1K. I have found some good ones below $1K. But again, this strays WAY off topic.

 

[pinnahertz]

well now you dont sound confident at all. what happen to slap in the face obvious?

so isnt slap in the face obvious should even more than just a border line satistically proven?

You've just asked an engineer if he could achieve a perfect score in an A/B test. I'm being truthful and accurate (and confident) with my answer. But a perfect score isn't necessary to prove beyond doubt that something is true. And just because in 998 out of 1000 trials it's completely obvious doesn't mean there might not be 2 trials where there's a bit of ambiguity.

Unfortunately for both of us the test can never be anything but 100% obvious because it cannot be done double-blind, so everyone will score a perfect score, even if no audio is every played. You can't listen to speakers with headphones on, and you can't listen to headphones when they are off your head.

 

[pinnahertz]

1979? now is 2017 and we have smyth. you are just ignoring technology or science is not technology?

Yes, because the technology is impractical, and can only be applied to a tiny fraction of 1% of all headphone listeners. And is IRRELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION!!!!!!

 

[gregorio]

This is why I like headphones. They do well for monitoring for sound precision. ... Low points are imaging, skew'd, being further alway from true, etc.., but the precision of the sound is different.

No, the precision of the sound is NOT different, precision includes imaging and depth, which is why headphones do NOT do well for monitoring!

[1] phone speakers are not mono. there are many phone with stereo speakers.
[2] read the next paragraph. it says that people should mix with speakers or speakers users and headphone for headphone users since nowadays there are more and more headphone users.
[3] My example is based on an auditorium recording of agt on youtube which i believe that is has a more neutral profile which doesnt specifically bias to speakers or headphone.

1. OK, that answers question #4, you obviously don't know what stereo imaging is! Do you have a cell phone a few feet wide or a head only an inch or so wide?
2. You read the next paragraph, why do you think it says that?
3. This is the sound science forum, NOT the forum of what you want to make up and/or believe!

[1] my theory may be BS but the fact that better headphone actually give the listen better soundstage and imaging is true.
[2] one of the highest fidelity speakers are like the electrostatics or hybrid like martin logan? or maybe some dolby atmos setup?
[3] whatever i say is based on my own experience and not repeating what BS other people said.

1. Your theory is BS and your conclusions based on your theory are therefore also BS!
2. OK, that tells us in addition to not actually knowing what stereo imagining is or how it works, you also don't know what "fidelity" is, let alone high fidelity!
3. You just don't seem to be getting it, THIS IS THE SOUND SCIENCE FORUM! You obviously don't know what stereo is, what fidelity is or even what science is! Science is NOT your personal experience and theories you've made up to explain your personal experience. In fact, the reason why science is needed and why it was invented in the first place is to separate actual fact from nonsense theories and superstitions invented by individuals to explain their personal experiences. Your approach to explaining what you experience and your resultant conclusions are the exact OPPOSITE of science and not only do you feel the need to publicly broadcast your nonsense conclusions but you've decided to do it in a forum actually called a science forum, how crazy is that?

You can continue to broadcast your nonsense theories/facts/conclusions, insult those of us who are less ignorant, make yourself look like an ignorant fool and eventually get yourself banned from this forum OR, you can ask politely about stereo, imaging, sound stage and fidelity and learn some actual facts about what they are and how they work. Which of these two options do you choose?

G

 

[castleofargh]

my theory may be BS but the fact that better headphone actually give the listen better soundstage and imaging is true.

headphone and iem have more science than just the transducer or driver. sealing is important and nowadays there are more drivers, different drivers positioning and etc.

calling it BS is like telling everyone who reviewed headphone and iem BS.

one of the highest fidelity speakers are like the electrostatics or hybrid like martin logan? or maybe some dolby atmos setup?

i am no speaker experts so can you give me some example of some real hifi speakers?

i think for every hifi speakers there should be an equivalent in a form of headphone.

honestly do you guys even listen to both speakers and headphone/iem or you guys are just speaking theoritically?

whatever i say is based on my own experience and not repeating what BS other people said.

try using a cheap earbud and compare against a 200 dollars good sealing iem or a cheap 100 dollars headphone can tell me you hear no difference in imaging of the recording of any album.

is that a response to my post? really? I don't share your passion for random fishing and attrition by nonsense so I'll stop here. have fun explaining to gregorio and pinnahertz how soundstage works... I just hope you can at some point see the irony.

 

[gunwale]

You've just asked an engineer if he could achieve a perfect score in an A/B test. I'm being truthful and accurate (and confident) with my answer. But a perfect score isn't necessary to prove beyond doubt that something is true. And just because in 998 out of 1000 trials it's completely obvious doesn't mean there might not be 2 trials where there's a bit of ambiguity.

Unfortunately for both of us the test can never be anything but 100% obvious because it cannot be done double-blind, so everyone will score a perfect score, even if no audio is every played. You can't listen to speakers with headphones on, and you can't listen to headphones when they are off your head.

i did not say 100%. i said it should not be just at border line like maybe a 45/55%.

and experience engineer should be be at least 80%?

the reason why i chose open back headphone is because you can actually hear sound both from the headphone and speaker without taking off the headphone. (at least mine can and probably most can)

are you telling me that you need use your hands to reposition your ears or maybe close of side of your ears do the listening test?

i am not engineer, not a sound or speaker experts so can you enlighten me on how do you actually listen to a speaker system?

 

[gunwale]

is that a response to my post? really? I don't share your passion for random fishing and attrition by nonsense so I'll stop here. have fun explaining to gregorio and pinnahertz how soundstage works... I just hope you can at some point see the irony.

the reply is to you.

as the forum moderate you arrogantly said that all headphone and iem regardless of design does not improve imaging and soundstage or perhaps i misinterpreted you?

my theory may be BS it could be headstage and etc.

 

[gunwale]

No, the precision of the sound is NOT different, precision includes imaging and depth, which is why headphones do NOT do well for monitoring!

1. OK, that answers question #4, you obviously don't know what stereo imaging is! Do you have a cell phone a few feet wide or a head only an inch or so wide?
2. You read the next paragraph, why do you think it says that?
3. This is the sound science forum, NOT the forum of what you want to make up and/or believe!



1. Your theory is BS and your conclusions based on your theory are therefore also BS!
2. OK, that tells us in addition to not actually knowing what stereo imagining is or how it works, you also don't know what "fidelity" is, let alone high fidelity!
3. You just don't seem to be getting it, THIS IS THE SOUND SCIENCE FORUM! You obviously don't know what stereo is, what fidelity is or even what science is! Science is NOT your personal experience and theories you've made up to explain your personal experience. In fact, the reason why science is needed and why it was invented in the first place is to separate actual fact from nonsense theories and superstitions invented by individuals to explain their personal experiences. Your approach to explaining what you experience and your resultant conclusions are the exact OPPOSITE of science and not only do you feel the need to publicly broadcast your nonsense conclusions but you've decided to do it in a forum actually called a science forum, how crazy is that?

You can continue to broadcast your nonsense theories/facts/conclusions, insult those of us who are less ignorant, make yourself look like an ignorant fool and eventually get yourself banned from this forum OR, you can ask politely about stereo, imaging, sound stage and fidelity and learn some actual facts about what they are and how they work. Which of these two options do you choose?

G

there are two types of science, theoritical and experimental science.

my experiment is the later science. it may sound BS but unlikely to be totally wrong unless proven with like an equation otherwise.

the phone example is kinda extreme so lets go on into bluetooth speakers. do bluetooth speakers have stereo imaging?

i think it does but probably not as good as the state of the art stereo imaging in some fancy studio.

can you explain to me the difference between a real calibrated studio and the smyth realizer in terms of sound stage and imaging?

 

[pinnahertz]

i did not say 100%.

You said exactly that right here:

how confident are you to score a perfect score?

What would you call a "perfect score?" Something less than 100%? Now we're really off in the land of nonsense!

i said it should not be just at border line like maybe a 45/55%.

No, you did not! IF you think you did, then cite the exact post.

and experience engineer should be be at least 80%?

Where on earth did you get that????

the reason why i chose open back headphone is because you can actually hear sound both from the headphone and speaker without taking off the headphone. (at least mine can and probably most can)

Yes, I thought that's why you picked open back headphones. They may be open back, but not acoustically transparent. There's a huge driver in there blocking direct sound to your ear from the outside. You cannot do that test correctly without removing the headphones because their presence causes a bias. You aren't really hearing the speakers without that bias. But even if you don't remove the headphones, and just include the bias, the difference will be clearly obvious to anyone.

are you telling me that you need use your hands to reposition your ears or maybe close of side of your ears do the listening test?

If you think I am, then quote me saying that. Otherwise stop making stuff up.

i am not engineer, not a sound or speaker experts

You've already plainly established that. Not a headphone expert either. Nor an expert in any aspect of sound. We've all got that.

so can you enlighten me on how do you actually listen to a speaker system?

Well, I park my hind end in my LP facing my speakers, I turn on the system, then play something, and listen. Occasionally I tap my feet. Sometimes I sip a drink, usually water, but on special occasions something stronger. But I don't drink tequila because apparently tequila makes me dance.

 

[pinnahertz]

there are two types of science, theoritical and experimental science.

No, they are both part of the same science.

my experiment is the later science.

I see absolutely no evidence of the scientific method in anything you've posted, so I doubt that strongly.

it may sound BS but unlikely to be totally wrong unless proven with like an equation otherwise.

In actual science it is possible to prove or disprove something without an equation. An expert in experimental science would know that.

the phone example is kinda extreme so lets go on into bluetooth speakers. do bluetooth speakers have stereo imaging?

i think it does but probably not as good as the state of the art stereo imaging in some fancy studio.

Yeah. Probably not as good.

can you explain to me the difference between a real calibrated studio and the smyth realizer in terms of sound stage and imaging?

Off topic, and irrelevant. Start a new thread, and we'll deal with it there.

"Mother always said I'd die from incompetence. I finally know what she meant!" - Dominar Rygel XVI