[up late]

i don't buy into the loudspeakers vs headphones dichotomy. i enjoy having both options for the distinctly different listening experiences that they provide. i regard them as complementary in that sense so i probably shouldn't have posted here.

 

[Dillan]

i don't buy into the loudspeakers vs headphones dichotomy. i enjoy having both options for the distinctly different listening experiences that they provide. i regard them as complementary in that sense so i probably shouldn't have posted here.

 
No, youre absolutely right. Its like comparing running shoes to boots.
 
I wear running shoes when I go for a jog and they help a lot.. then I wear boots to walk in the mud or rough terrain and they help a lot as well. I choose the best option for my situation and each are wonderful!

 

[Martijn W]

i don't buy into the loudspeakers vs headphones dichotomy. i enjoy having both options for the distinctly different listening experiences that they provide. i regard them as complementary in that sense so i probably shouldn't have posted here.

Good post. I can only agree..

 

[pOOB73]

It's just always funny when someone here is talking about a headphone's "soundstage" who probably never had the pleasure of experiencing a decent pair of stereo speakers in a proper setup.

 

[Dillan]

Yea I think headphone soundstage and speaker soundstage is a little different. A lot of the words we use to describe the sound has different meaning when compared with speakers.
 
When I get my speaker setup, it won't "replace" my headphones, they will just compliment each other.

 

[exsomnis]

There are obvious different use case scenarios for loudspeakers and headphones. And so the obvious thing to say is that you use such and such for this purpose, and so on for a different purpose. Jogging, walking, taking a piss, whatever.
 
But this being head-fi, derived from the term hi-fi, which stands for high fidelity - the actual question is, between loudspeakers and headphones, which of these reproduce sound of a higher fidelity than the other? Right now, the best loudspeaker setups trounce the best headphone setups for sonic fidelity and realism.
 
With the best possible loudspeaker setups, it is possible to be fooled into thinking that a musical performance is happening live, right there in front of you. Even mid to high end loudspeaker setups allow you to identify where the instruments are positioned, several feet in and around the loudspeakers.
 
The best possible headphone setups have gotten things like tone, timbre and presence to remarkably excellent levels. But the one thing that they all fail at right now is imaging and sound stage, which is only going to be at most an inch or two in and around the head.
 
It is an especially pertinent question for anyone who has just discovered the audiophile in themselves and is wondering which route to take, loudspeakers or headphones. After all, 'cost is no object' will be a foreign term for the vast majority of us - most of us will not be able to achieve extremely good fidelity in both our loudspeaker and headphone systems due to the great expense.
 
In my case, I fully understood the limitations of headphones but because I didn't have the space for a proper hifi system setup with loudspeakers and am still sickened by the cost of high end hifi gear - headphones are my only real option for enjoying the music, the pursuit and the high fidelity of sound reproduction.

 

[jcx]

the Smyth SVS Realizer was mentioned a few years earlier in this thread - I think it should be brought up again both as a worthy product and as an intellectual point about how to bridge the difference between headphone and loudspeaker/room sound
 
http://www.smyth-research.com/technology.html
 
having heard a demo with personal calibration I, and most others have been really impressed with the "these speakers, in this room" sound
 
many are hoping for cheaper virtualization technology to catch up - but Smyth does what it does really well right now - and demonstrates that generic solutions without personal HRTF and head angle tracking/interpolation will often fall short

 

[exsomnis]

They can mimic speaker soundstage and 3d imaging but the accuracy and fidelity is not quite there. Tyll's observation too.

 

[RRod]

  They can mimic speaker soundstage and 3d imaging but the accuracy and fidelity is not quite there. Tyll's observation too.

 
Much of that seems to come down to a) it's hard to forget you're wearing headphones and b) dat tactile bass, which we all love. I too feel that the ultimate "holodeck" sensation isn't going to happen with transducers strapped to our heads.

 

[jcx]

both articles seem to highly endorse the SVS Realizer results
 
the dynamics difference comments are interesting too - the supplied Stax ES headphones will be much more linear over all volume ranges up to clipping than almost any dynamic loudspeaker
 
so if dynamics in loudspeakers are at all related to their nonlinear behavior at large SPL vs lower levels then the difference likely does escape Smyth's modeling and it could be argued that the ES headphone dynamics is expected to be the more accurate

 

[murphythecat]

Arguably, a very small single driver making all the sound (headphones) and without a room to colour the sound is more accurate by default then a speaker with many drivers, a XO,, the crossover components, the room, the off axis response, ect.
 
However, the sound pressure that speakers do in a room, the soundstage being put in front of you with a real phantom center, feeling the bass with your body, ect is just two different experience and cannot be replicated with software + headphones.

 

[Dillan]

I mean.. I definitely agree that no headphone can really match a well built set of speakers in an acoustically treated room.
 
But this argument really doesn't make much sense to me. It seems really silly to compare.

 

[murphythecat]

  I mean.. I definitely agree that no headphone can really match a well built set of speakers in an acoustically treated room.
 
But this argument really doesn't make much sense to me. It seems really silly to compare.

exactly. no need to compare. they are not comparable, they are very different presentation and are complimentary
 
Its like comparing two sports like golf and hockey. they cant compare butthey are both fun!
 
But to imply that one is more accurate, or one is better then the other makes no sense.

 

[jcx]

if industry only makes golf balls then hockey stick owners are going to be at a disadvantage - and the overwhelming majority of music is mixed/mastered for loudspeakers in rooms, monitored over loudspeakers in rooms, with significant multichannel content too beyond Stereo
 
despite the large amount of music now being listened to over headphones (or at least earbuds) there is little source that take the difference between them and loudspeakers in rooms into account

 

[up late]

... But this being head-fi, derived from the term hi-fi, which stands for high fidelity - the actual question is, between loudspeakers and headphones, which of these reproduce sound of a higher fidelity than the other?...

that's how you've chosen to frame the discussion but it isn't the actual question that the op asked, which relates to personal preference. but you've answered it anyway by using the term "high fidelity" subjectively.