>He uses speakers over headphones

>>73899659
depends on which speakers

>>73899659
>Using Speaker in 2017

Just buy studio monitors if you want loud and accurate sound.

>>73899659
Good speakers will always be better than good headphones. I enjoy headphones, but my speakers are just amazing, similar price too.

Might be a meme, but I use speakers when I can now because I've heard it's better for your hearing in the long run.

Obviously I could just be turning the volume down with headphones in, but it's also kind of a burden to wear them in summer. And again I could buy less bulky headphones, but I don't like the feel of more compact headphones.

Almost all music was recorded to be played on speakers.

>>73899739
You tend to not turn speakers up as loud because you can feel how loud it is. If you're wearing headphones and try to drown out sound outdoors, you'll tend to turn them up dangerously high. If you typically listen at low levels I can't see it being a problem.

>>73899659
0/10
>>73899813
music designed specifically for headphones is generally bedroom producer bullshit designed for loners who never listen to anything around other people

>>73899735
>Good speakers will always be better than good headphones.
eh, sort of, speakers that perform well are proportionally far more expensive than headphones, plus you need a good room to go with it

>>73899850
>music designed specifically for headphones is generally bedroom producer bullshit designed for loners who never listen to anything around other people
It's how most people listen to music now, though.

>>73899659
>not listening on speakers for high quality sound that fucking shakes you to your bones
headphones don't give you the same energy at all

>>73899850
when you realize later how misguided that statement was, just know that i forgive you for it

>>73899883
yes, and it's weird to me, music was always meant to be shared.

File: Screenshot_56.jpg (68KB, 254x429px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 254x429px

>>73899659
WHAT CHU MEAN HOMIE?

>>73899954
Wtf is that

>>73899971
MOTHAFUCKINASS GOBLIN SHIT HOMIE

File: QFU2fraLLSbGloAxaDjfeitlkv9JtvJ_WV8gstjZPhE.jpg (135KB, 768x768px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 768x768px

>>73899971
HEHEHEHEHEHEH

>>73899913
What? Music in general wasn't "meant to be" anything other than listened to. There's no universally applicable purpose or social function for it.

And no one wants to participate in the experience of listening to Whitehouse or whatever, so just wear headphones.

>>73899971
He's the best scooter rider in the country, please get your shit together before posting again

>>73899912
I was shit posting as i always do, however speakers are better in my opinion
>>73899998
I was stating an opinion, of course most artists couldn't give a fuck how you listen to their stuff but if anything this board proves music is largely a social experience, maybe there is not universal function or application, but the same could be said about anything really, I liked to think maybe this was more than a circlejerk of nerds trying to prove their taste is superior to everyone else's

>>73899995
wtf is that???/

File: kMJBVxuirzK_7GpJ4wF6zyIyi_ioAJHEY5XioK_5slY.png (253KB, 399x767px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 399x767px

>>73900098
????????????

Headphones are trash. Good for portability and isolation, but speakers obliterate them in every conceivable way. Dsp room correction and directivity is so good now, headphones lose out to maybe the one thing they had over speakers: taking the room problems out of the equation.

Headphones are a total joke when it comes to dynamics and soundstage, as well.

199.99 Jbl lsr 305s>any headphones on the planet.

No reason to have headphones (other than for listening to music on the go) unless your live in a cardboard box.

>>73900166
>Dsp room correction and directivity is so good now, headphones lose out to maybe the one thing they had over speakers: taking the room problems out of the equation.
Room correction only results in a significant improvement if the room is well treated to begin with.

>Headphones are a total joke when it comes to dynamics and soundstage, as well.
Many speakers are also a total joke when it comes to dynamics, and stereo speakers have a rather shit soundstage as well

>199.99 Jbl lsr 305s>any headphones on the planet.
not true by any metric

>>73900228
what about desktop speakers?

The people I've seen using speakers tend to listen to music I don't like, I wish they used headphones instead.

>>73900247
>what about desktop speakers?
What about them? They're not going to be particularly good at anything.

>>73900257
are they any good though?

>>73900347
why not just use regular speakers?

>>73900347
They can be usable but not great. In general they're not going to perform better than headphones.

>>73899659
>he

File: Aud.jpg (111KB, 800x474px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 800x474px

>>73900228
>Room correction only results in a significant improvement if the room is well treated to begin with.

Untrue.

Here's the results for Audyssey XT, which is available in pretty much every decent consumer grade receiver these days.

+/- 3 db across the whole range aside from that small 5 db bump in the low end (which probably won't even be noticeable).

Furthermore, per the work of Floyd Toote, early reflections are actually beneficial to sound quality as the improve spaciousness and scope.

Toole also discovered via blind listening tests that the human brain/ear mechanism is actually able to stream the sound of the speaker apart from the room.

For listening (not recording, mind you), "room problems" are highly overrated.

>Many speakers are also a total joke when it comes to dynamics, and stereo speakers have a rather shit soundstage as well.

Only bad speakers. Other than that, said no one ever about a good stereo setup. But even bad speakers crush headphones in the soundstage department, since headphones don't have a soundstage.

>not true by any metric

http://noaudiophile.com/JBL_LSR305/

Measured crammed into his desk nook, as well.

Go look at any headphone freq response graph. They always have a rising response from 0-2000hz and then go spastic with rises and drops much greater than +/- 3 db after that.

I do realize that headphones have to aim for a different response curve than speakers due to their relative driver placement (in/near the ears), but that's another reason they're shit, i.e. non-linearity.

>>73900458
>Untrue.
Do you understand what it does outside the sweet spot? Do you understand what it does to the dynamic range? Or the time domain response?

>+/- 3 db across the whole range aside from that small 5 db bump in the low end (which probably won't even be noticeable).
With third octave smoothing...

>For listening (not recording, mind you), "room problems" are highly overrated.
Do you know what this entails? The resonances of the room result in huge fluctuations in frequency response.

>Only bad speakers.
And by that metric, all speakers are bad until they're $2000 at least

>Measured crammed into his desk nook, as well.
Looks like third octave smoothing again.

>Go look at any headphone freq response graph. They always have a rising response from 0-2000hz and then go spastic with rises and drops much greater than +/- 3 db after that.
You'd see it on the speaker plots too if they weren't smoothed.

People who only uses headphones are lonely betas because they no one ever tries to contact them so they don't have to worry about missing a phone call

File: 8d5b9355757bbe378b93464f183fff4b (1).png (41KB, 630x489px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 630x489px

>>73900557
>Do you understand what it does outside the sweet spot? Do you understand what it does to the dynamic range? Or the time domain response?

This is isn't 2007. Dirac Live, MiniDSP, etc don't have those issues to the extent where they're noticeable.

>Third octave smoothing.

Headphones look just as shitty with smoothing as they do with it off. Again, I know headphones often shoot for odd curves to compensate for driver placement (or to render their "signature sound"), but that simply illustrates how problematic it is to have a transducer that close to your ears.

>And by that metric, all speakers are bad until they're $2000 at least

Now we're back in the 1980s. First of all, soundstage usually have more to do with the way the music is recorded than anything else, so even a shitty pair of 40.00 desktops can render it a soundstage on a good recording. Secondly, there's dozens of modern speaker systems under 2K that measure godly in all the key areas: on-axis, off-axis, polar response, etc.

>Do you know what this entails? The resonances of the room result in huge fluctuations in frequency response.

For sound reproduction, those issues aren't a problem. In fact, a speaker dominates the room in all frequencies above 200hz. Bass is the one thing that has always been tough to get right in home listening rooms.

>Below 200 Hz the acoustics of different locations in the room are dominated by discrete resonances. Above 200 Hz these resonances become so tightly packed in frequency and space that the room behaves quite uniformly and is best described by its reverberation time RT60

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/rooms.htm

>>73900458
On the JBL's being "better than any headphone" - maybe from a technical point of view if the technical stat you care about is accuracy across a frequency range but in terms of enjoyment, there are lots of headphones that a lot of experienced listeners would prefer, given the right music.

On the issue of standard pro and consumer audio measurements and how useful they actually are, this is pretty eye opening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V6YN-mshmY

>>73900776
This is also worth watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDRHFNfFCFU

>>73901042
>but in terms of enjoyment, there are lots of headphones that a lot of experienced listeners would prefer, given the right music.

Agreed. I'm a subjectivist at the end of the day. Listen to what sounds best to you.

I brought up the JBLs to debunk the long held myth that you need thousands of dollars of speakers, amps, etc, etc to equal a hundred dollar pair of headphones.

That has never been true. And I'm not sure how that myth even got started.

>>73899998
Music was meant to be something. It has had a social and rithualistic meaning since the invention of it by cavemen.

The fact that we mostly listen to music alone by people producing music alone just speaks about where our society's going.

That doesn't take the social meaning out of it, though. We listen to music to feel some sort of connection, some empathy, something else than ourselves.

>>73899659
Cx

wtf is this audiophile nerd babble thread
im here for ice poosidon

File: 1493054725306.gif (1MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x225px

>>73899659
>using headphones over nearfield monitors + sub in an acoustically treated room

>>73899717
>Studio monitors
>Accurate sound
The term you're looking for is neutral. And the only use for most studio monitors is listening to material which isn't mixed and mastered.

>>73901817
Not something just about anyone can afford, is it?

>>73899954
TriHard