Listening to Hi-Fi through headphones

You can buy a decent pair of headphones for about £100. You do not need to to spend a fortune on a famous branded name which is marketed using the names of pop stars or rugby players; as you will be paying for the publicity rather than the quality of the sound reproduction.

Not so long ago I bought a cheap pair of Sennheiser 'phones for about £25 for use with Skype etc. when I plugged them into a combined DAC and headphone amplifier and listened to some CD quality music I was astonished at how good they sounded. I could hardly hear any difference between them and a pair of Audio Technica 'phones costing many times more.

The frequency response of the Sennheissers was limited to 15 KHz and those of the Audio Technica up to 45 KHz. Why could I hear very little difference in the upper range of the frequencies?

Here are some good reasons why.

My middle aged ears can no longer hear a 15 KHz tone.

There is very little music happening at 15 KHz.  The primary harmonics of most musical instruments rarely climb above 4 KHz.

LPs are usually limited to a highest frequency of 15 KHz for production reasons.

CDs perform better as far as frequency response go but only some children can hear tones above 15KHz.

"HIRES" music files can reproduce tones much higher than a CD but nobody, not even the fittest 4 year old, can hear a tone above the CD limit of 22 KHz.

The £25 Sennheiser  'phones are able to reproduce all the musical frequencies that most people can hear without noticeable distortion. They are almost perfect at reproducing Hi-Fi sound with a linear response. The Audio Technica 'phones are almost perfect too and cannot be criticised in terms of value for money.

If you are prepared to put up with the plastic construction and feel of the £25 Sennheiser 'phones and their lack of street credibility then you have got yourself a very good buy.


Headphones have advantages over listening through speakers: 

You have to pay a lot more for Speakers giving a similar sonic performance,

You hear the music unhindered by the echoes and sound absorption from your room and its furniture,

The music is closer to your ears and year can hear sonic imperfections better when you are making comparisons.

You do not disturb your neighbours when playing the music loud.

They also have disadvantages:

You could be tempted to play the music too loud and damage your ears,

They can be uncomfortable,

You never hear sounds in a natural environment so close to your ears so 'phones can feel unnatural. For this reason I rarely listen through 'phones.

Headphones can block out the sound of your surroundings and in certain situations this could be dangerous especially when crossing the road or driving - you have to be more visually aware of what is happening around you.

It is anti-social to listen to music with 'phones when you are surrounded by your family and friends.


Headphones are great for making musical comparisons , however.

The other day I was listening to some 180 and 200 gm brand new LPs and I thought it would be a great idea to make comparisons to their CD equivalents.

I heard these faults on the LPs through the headphones which I could not hear on the CD equivalent:

Noticeable rumble for the LP surface in the quiet bits of the album and in between tracks,

Noticeable hiss from the LP service on the quiet bits and between the tracks,

At elevated and uncomfortable listening levels I could hear the rumble of the turntable motor,

Clicks, pops and crackles in the quiet bits of the records,

On one of The Beatles tracks I could hear noticeable harmonic distortion possibly created by the original disc cutting or from an uneven pressing at the factory or both.

Listening through headphones demonstrates that LP sound reproduction has fundamental flaws which cannot be eliminated even with the highest quality turntables and cartridges.

All in all listening to  CD was a more pleasant experience even though the LPs still sounded quite good. It really is not a good idea to listen to LPs through headphones especially when classical music is playing. I can't for the life of me appreciate some of Audiophile claims that LP sound quality is better than CD.

When I listen to an LP through speakers, the speakers themselves and the room acoustics seem to soften the sound of LP faults. However, even though I cannot hear the rumble and hiss at normal listening volumes, I can still hear the clicks, crackles and pops on the softer parts of the music and this is with a brand new LP.

If I ignore the faults of an  LP  then the music on a brand new album does not sound substantially different to its CD equivalent. However, if I were to be pedantic then I  would opine that LP reproduction cannot claim to be of genuine Hi-Fi quality.

Comparing the sound quality of HIRES and CD quality music using headphones.

I have bought some 24/96 music from the internet and then down sampled it using DbPoweramp to CD quality. When I listen through headphones I cannot hear any difference no matter how hard I try.

When I have inverted the 16/44.1 using Audacity and then played this file back at the same time with its HIRES equivalent using a null test then I hear nothing; which proves to me that there is no audible difference between a HIRES file and a CD file - to my ears anyway.

hhttp://sdk.bongiovidps.com/2013/09/26/audio-null-test/


Headphones can be very useful tools and can expose many Hi-Fi myths.

Hi-Fi Forums and bunkum

I always find it amusing to read most of the Hi-Fi forums. Most of what you read is unmitigated tripe. One forum has even banned comment from a famous audio engineer who dares to challenge the opinions with reason and science.

It is my opinion that most Hi-Fi equipment  should, in the modern era, sound very good if you play a well mastered CD or a well kept LP which is undamaged and not worn out.

In the analogue arena real improvements were made to consumer grade equipment in the early 1970s - from then on any improvement has been marginal. In my time, I have listened to dozens of turntable, amplifier and loudspeaker combinations. It was not often that I could hear a clear difference in the equipment no matter what the costs were. This, of course, has to be the case with analogue Hi-Fi equipment; once it reaches an acceptable standard each piece in the audio chain should sound similar. Any difference should be so marginal that either the listener hears a very subtle change or no change at all when making comparisons. All this stands to reason. If you claim to hear "a night and day difference" between two pieces of Hi-Fi quality equipment  then you are either lying, fooling yourself or just trying to wind up your audience. Most of the participants in Hi-Fi forums never substantiate their exaggerated claims with the results of a double blind test.

The same reasoning applies to digital sound reproduction equipment. There are are now substantial discussions going on, on some of the forums, about which is better DSD or PCM digital musical files. Once again any difference is marginal - it has to be.

Time and time again double blind tests have been made to ascertain whether individuals can discern any difference between a CD file, DSD quality file at a 24/96 or 24/192 quality file when all other parameters are equal. So far no-one has been identified who can reliably tell the difference. All of this stands to reason because a CD can accurately reproduce all music which a human being can hear. Even though, in theory, a DSD music file can reproduce a greater frequency range than a CD, humans cannot perceive that extra range. A CD can reproduce the full dynamic range of all music and more. Any extra dynamic range which a DSD music file or a "HiRes" file can provide is simply redundant.

Here is one forum that is refreshingly objective and bucks the trend:

http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?2505-The-last-words-on-audio-amplifiers-Jan-2015[/URL