My headphones ARE better than your expensive monitors.

[Captain Caveman]

Norm loves music. Since 1976 he has accumulated, discarded and honed every aspect of his home entertainment system and remodelled his home with no regard for expense, nor two marriages. He laughed in the face of cassette tapes, but invested heavily in early Compact Disc playing systems and subsequently found nirvana in DVD-Audio and the most lusted for surround systems money can buy.

He has had his seating and speaker positioning in his home entertainment room measured professionally and begrudges the fact that the apex of his sweet spot is halfway between him and his wifes chair. When he is alone he leans uncomfortably to the left to get the full effect of his uber-system. Norm knows best.... Norm knows that when going to the cinema you have to get the reserved seats in the surround sweet spot to get the full effect of the film. What are the rest of the masses doing sitting at either side of the hall, let alone at any of the four corners?

-----------

Leaving aside the fact that you can't mix in surround in headphones, the fact of the matter is that practically nobody on this sweet planet sits in an equilateral position to their speakers. Hardly anybody knows about this or cares, and even for the people that do care, the difference between a stereo image - with properly balanced levels through the essential mono-checks - in headphones and speakers is negligable.... in a real world situation.

I have never came across a Norm. I have met people with Norm-esque characteristics, but never a true Norm. Since 99.999% of stereo music is listened to with headphones, mono systems or such incorrectly positions stereo speakers that they may as well be mono, I put it to the board that your fancy pants monitors mean diddly-squat (if it is acceptable for someone from the civilised side of the pond to use such a phrase). You do need quality headphones with a true frequency response, just as in the olden days with actual speakers but still.... fancypants monitors.... Diddly.... Squat.

Yes, no, maybe?

:D

[Softy]

Not on your life, Captaindude! Headphones suck for anything other than monitoring while recording or shooting film/video. The one exception would be when listening to binaural recordings.

Well that's my purist side talking. On the other hand, it's sometimes nice to listen to things privately, or to just listen to interesting stereo soundfields with headphones just for the fun of it.

I AM Norm, by the way.

[Captain Caveman]

Sorry, to qualify for Normism you are not allowed to make music, only listen to it. You are therefore ruled out from the Norm Club on that basis, leaving the worldwide membership stable at 173.

If you could elaborate on the slightly headphonist statement "headphones suck for...." with some reasoning, that would be smashing. :) Bearing in mind that clearly I am talking about cans with a flat frequency response and also checking in mono. Leaving aside the obvious advantage of cans in that the room doesn't affect the sound, what are the specific disadvantages?

Perhaps my opinions have been rudely tainted by the exellent Ultrasone Proline range, which have offset drivers in them - therefore making them smarter than your average cans.

Flat-response cans vs flat-response monitors. Hmm, hmm. :)

[Softy]

I assure you that I more than qualify for membership in the Norm club. What makes you think I make music? And furthermore, my listening chair is located precisely in the sweet spot apex. My wife, should she be allowed in the room at all, can sit somewhere off to the side. She wouldn't care anyway. My listening/mixing/editing room was specifically engineered around my two listening positions - one right behind the mix control surface, and one at the sweet spot of my surround playback system. The former being where I do critical adjustments to stereo images, the latter used mainly for kicking back and watching movies, or just stepping back from the engineering process to listen to a mix in a more casual context on the couch. And oh by the way, I was doing serious recording, and collecting records and audio gear before 1976.

As for adding some reasoning, the primary disadvantage of listening to recorded music with headphones is that most mixes are done on monitors in a room, with the assumption that the material will be listened to that way. Because of this, a certain amount of acoustical support is presumed to be present in the listening environment, which would of course not be the case when using headphones. The presumption of acoustical support is factored into creative recording and mixing decisions. This is not to say that people don't ever make recordings specifically for headphones. Such recordings, like binaural recordings of symphonic music in concert halls can be stunningly breathtaking, listened to on great headphones.

You bring up an interesting point, when you say that a LOT of music is listened to on headphones (or at least earbuds) nowadays. I'm hoping that the fact that the consumer market is going that way will not cause mix engineers to start mixing primarily for headphone listeners. They don't need to since most of those people are listening to mp3 players with earbuds, and wouldn't notice even nonsubtle changes, whereas audiophiles listening on high end playback systems most definitely would.

[Captain Caveman]

I am sorry to reject your membership twice on Christmas Eve, but the Norm club excludes all audio manipulators, not just the music makers. The Norm Club is exclusively for present day listeners/consumers: the end users who cannot write off high end gear in their tax returns; the lovers of audio for whom the gear is a means to enjoy commercial productions more - not a tool to base stereo field and mix decisions on.

When you say that recordings are made with acoustic support in mind, you will accept that the very nature of acoustics mean that no two rooms are the same. Leading on from that, there is an especially wide gulf between the well treated control room and the fashionably hard-surfaced, node-inducing spaces of your average consumer listening environments. Scientifically speaking, the happy medium isn't the well treated control room - it's a poorly treated control room. Acoustic treatment and room measurements are therfore taken a bit too seriously, if my point is taken as such. ;)

Crosstalk is the only constant, and even that isn't a constant constant.

So would I be right in taking a sharp 90 degree turn and saying that my headphones are better than your expensive monitors, if I use a cross-talk plugin and a convolution reverb of a nice control room?

:)

[Softy]

In a word, no.

And I DEMAND to be let into the Norm club damnit!

[SoundmanJohn]

If you could elaborate on the slightly headphonist statement "headphones suck for...." with some reasoning, that would be smashing. :)

I have yet to find a pair of headphones that produce trouser-flapping bass.

Happy Christmas.

John

P.S. You can find some of the world's arch-Norms in various guises on the Sursound list.

[Softy]

Yeah! There's another good point!

[craij]

I used to think headphones were better. In addition, I believe a larger part of our audience is migrating towards headphones each decade. But then, a friend (on this board) showed me the light with some "decent" monitors (low end in the grand scheme of things)... room dynamics play such a large part in this audio experience. In short, even as a relative newb, I vote for diddly-squat-monitors.

[Jonesy]

But if the Norms listen to Massive Attack on headphones they won't be able to appreciate all of the out of phase stuff on 100th Window.

[Softy]

Why not?

[believe it or not, this forum won't accept a post as short as "Why not?" So I had to add this comment]

[Captain Caveman]

Ok, ok, ok it's Christmas and everyone can join the Norm club.

[/devils advocate]

Merry Christmas Thunderdomers!!

:)

[LEX]

HMMM! Cough! BRRRRNT!

Better than headphones (http://www.egglestonworks.com/ivy.htm)

Yep. They are better.

I'll bet you a pair of them. You have to pay for shipping as well.

LEX

[Jonesy]

Why not?

[believe it or not, this forum won't accept a post as short as "Why not?" So I had to add this comment]

Because with headphones only the left channel audio goes to the left ear, and only the right channel audio goes to the right ear. With speakers, both ears hear both channels of information with slightly different timing, ie: a natural soundstage. Because of this you cannot hear if something is out of phase between the channels with cans because there is no natural time delayed signal to both ears. Each ear only hears a half of the information that it would normally get when listening to speakers in open air. This is another good reason not to depend on cans to mix with.

[TAFKAT]

Because with headphones only the left channel audio goes to the left ear, and only the right channel audio goes to the right ear. With speakers, both ears hear both channels of information with slightly different timing, ie: a natural soundstage. Because of this you cannot hear if something is out of phase between the channels with cans because there is no natural time delayed signal to both ears. Each ear only hears a half of the information that it would normally get when listening to speakers in open air. This is another good reason not to depend on cans to mix with.

Hey Steve,

Thats a great explanation.. :-)

There was an article in Sound On Sound in January 2007, covering the subject of navigating around the limitations of the loss of the natural soundsatge with headphone mixes Here (http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan07/articles/mixingheadphones.htm)

Peace

[LEX]

HMMM! Cough! BRRRRNT!

Better than headphones (http://www.egglestonworks.com/ivy.htm)

Yep. They are better.

I'll bet you a pair of them. You have to pay for shipping as well.

LEX

cough, scratch!

LEX

[TAFKAT]

Hey Lex,

Are they actual studio reference monitors, they remind me of these weird arse audiophile jobs an Australian guy designed and manufactured in the 90's ?

[LEX]

They are audiophile monitors.

96k a pair.

Actually, these are the monitors Bob Ludwig uses to master with.

They weigh 790lb each.

They sound incredible. There isn't anything headphones can touch really.

LEX

[OpenMind]

cough, scratch!

LEX


Only 61,240 pounds ex VAT... each(???) :p


http://www.luxuryhifi.com/hifi/speakers/f/hifi_speakers_index_f.htm


EDIT: I was typing while you posted... but I see you found a cheaper adress :cool: :D

[Softy]

Because with headphones only the left channel audio goes to the left ear, and only the right channel audio goes to the right ear. With speakers, both ears hear both channels of information with slightly different timing, ie: a natural soundstage. Because of this you cannot hear if something is out of phase between the channels with cans because there is no natural time delayed signal to both ears. Each ear only hears a half of the information that it would normally get when listening to speakers in open air. This is another good reason not to depend on cans to mix with.

This is an incorrect assessment. If the sound sources were recorded in stereo (with actual L-R phase information say, as a result of room reflections present during recording), then that natural soundstage will be in the recording, and most definitely discernible when listening with headphones. Whatever additional reflections are created by the listing environment when listening to speakers in a room are not at all useful for determining what phase relationships exist in the recording. (That's why we Norms have engineered listening spaces).

[Jonesy]

This is an incorrect assessment. If the sound sources were recorded in stereo (with actual L-R phase information say, as a result of room reflections present during recording), then that natural soundstage will be in the recording, and most definitely discernible when listening with headphones. Whatever additional reflections are created by the listing environment when listening to speakers in a room are not at all useful for determining what phase relationships exist in the recording. (That's why we Norms have engineered listening spaces).

I am not talking about room reflections, I am talking about both ears hearing both speakers. In that case if something is phase reversed between L&R you will hear the usual off-balance feeling that we all hear when there is phase cancellation going on. On headphones you cannot hear this because each ear only hears half of the information.

Don't confuse binaural recording with a normal multitrack mix. Yes, if you stand at the end of a concert grand listening to a performance you will get the same sound with headphones if the piano was recorded with a dummy head and binaural mic's in the same position, because BOTH mics hear the entire soundfield with the two mics having the width of a human head between them. Normal pop music desk mixes are nothing like this.

As you said, the natural soundstage would be the recording. A mix is not a recording, it is a mix. You cannot hear phase problems between 2 channels unless you can hear both channels together at the same time and place. Headphones do not deliver that condition, they deliver each channel exclusively to each ear. Room reflections have nothing to do with it. There are no conditions in nature whatsoever where human ears hear different soundscapes exclusively and independently. There is no actual way in reality for you to stand in front of a band and hear specific instruments in one ear and not the other. In a mix you can pan the tambo hard to one side and the maraca hard to the left, and the only place on earth that you can actually hear it that way is with headphones. Therefore headphones can in no way ever replicate a real soundfield except with dummy head recordings.

[Softy]

You're not talking about phase issues. You're talking about polarity issues. I find it very hard to believe that one couldn't detect an out of polarity problem with headphones. That's just a gross version of a phase issue. I'll have to setup an experiment to try that. I've never used headphones when mixing. So I'm not going to take the position that I speak from experience in this case.

I'll ponder your points about it, but I'll be amazed if I can't tell the difference when having reversed polarity in one ear. It seems to me that the brain certainly would have to be able to recognize that. The more I think about it, the more absurd it seems. It is interesting though, to consider that in the case of in-air monitors, the ears have the additional spacial reference information to compare to.

[Softy]

Don't confuse binaural recording with a normal multitrack mix. Yes, if you stand at the end of a concert grand listening to a performance you will get the same sound with headphones if the piano was recorded with a dummy head and binaural mic's in the same position, because BOTH mics hear the entire soundfield with the two mics having the width of a human head between them. Normal pop music desk mixes are nothing like this.

I'm not confusing anything. "Normal" pop music recordings? What's a "normal" pop music recording, just a bunch of panned mono tracks? I don't think so.


As you said, the natural soundstage would be the recording. A mix is not a recording, it is a mix. You cannot hear phase problems between 2 channels unless you can hear both channels together at the same time and place. Headphones do not deliver that condition, they deliver each channel exclusively to each ear. Room reflections have nothing to do with it. There are no conditions in nature whatsoever where human ears hear different soundscapes exclusively and independently. There is no actual way in reality for you to stand in front of a band and hear specific instruments in one ear and not the other. In a mix you can pan the tambo hard to one side and the maraca hard to the left, and the only place on earth that you can actually hear it that way is with headphones. Therefore headphones can in no way ever replicate a real soundfield except with dummy head recordings.

This is a fun conversation. I wish we could have it in person, and say "Oh yeah?," run into the studio and do things to make our points. You are my kind of guy. And you ARE providing here an example that does illustrate one reason why headphones are not as good as monitors for mixing. It's an excellent example too. But I wasn't thinking about mixes of only mono sources panned around. I consider such mixes to be practically lifeless.

[Jonesy]

Well, in the spirit of not making an ass of myself, I just did this experiment. I took a mono kick drum track and loaded it into Nuendo. I duplicated the track and phase reversed it. As expected, no sound was heard when both tracks were played together and panned to the center, as they exactly cancelled each other.

Firstly, listening through nearfield monitors: Both tracks panned to center was silent, completely cancelled. When I panned the two tracks left and right, I heard the usual off-balance unpleasant opposite polarity sound, with the bass sounding vague and without a center image. When I pushed the mono button on the desk the sound collapsed to nearly nothing as expected, (but not perfectly cancelled, still a tiny signal due to imperfect level matching L-R on the console).

Then with monitors turned off and listening through headphones: With the two channels at opposite polarity and panned hard L-R, I could not hear that they were at opposite phase. The mono button still collapsed to near zero in the cans, but in stereo the bass did not sound obviously out of kilter. It sounded very slightly different, but I would guarantee that if you did not know that there was a complete phase reversal between the two channels you would not realize it when mixing. Until of course you heard it mono'd, and you would wonder why the kick drum was no longer in the track.

Tried it again, this time with a hi-hat track, and the differences were even less detectable, presumably due to the shorter wavelengths involved.

So it would seem that even at the low frequencies of a kick drum, the ear cannot tell that the L & R channels are at opposite phase when each ear only hears one channel and not the other, but when both ears hear both channels, it becomes immediately apparent that there is cancellation going on. This makes sense, because a lot of the cancellation will be occurring in the air itself, and the human ear is well attuned to listening to waveform interactions in the medium (air) that we spend our lives in. When the ears are isolated from their usual environment and sealed separately with an injected signal to each ear, all of those cues and interactions are removed and our ability to hear the phase difference disappears.

[Jonesy]

I'm not confusing anything. "Normal" pop music recordings? What's a "normal" pop music recording, just a bunch of panned mono tracks? I don't think so.

No, surely they aren't that...:eek: What I am getting at is that within a mix people often pan things hard right and left, for example the output of FX processors. These are the things that are susceptible to polarity/phase issues, such as when a patch lead is accidently inserted part way on 1 side of an FX patch and the reverb disappears when the track is played in mono. Parallel compression is another area where this can occur. Anywhere people duplicate or split a track and eventually mix them back together is a risk for phase mess-ups, like duplicating a guitar track and processing one side that then panning them.

Old school engineers usually hit the mono button regularly to check just this, but I would bet that most people there days do not. ;)

If you get time to try your own experiments I would be interested on your views, I guess we can't get into a studio together, but I agree we would have some fun, this kind of stuff is always interesting to play with in the real world.

[Jonesy]

Oh, BTW, I really enjoyed doing that experiment, the only part that I hated was that when the two tracks were solo'd, and I tried to mute one of them the mute button jammed on. Whenever I read someone saying that the solo/mute issue doesn't effect them, I have to wonder if we are using the same application.

[Softy]

Well that's quite interesting. Thanks for trying it. I'll eventually get around to playing with that too. But right now, I have a lot of stuff moved out of my control room in preparation for installing carpet.

Now that you mention it, that part about the phase cancellation occuring in the air itself makes a lot of sense. We would never have needed to evolve to do localization with headphones on would we?