Are separates on borrowed time?
Maybe, but only for those with impaired hearing or happy with 2nd best and poor taste in music perhaps?
headphones will only beat a hi-fi if you havent got the faintest clue about soundstaging and imaging - i have a good set of headphones and i still cannot get used to the in-your-head imaging aspect - and i actually find the whole headphones experience to be pathetic - so its all about what you look for in your sound - i dont only listen to the words but my hi-fi is okay and i have heard many high end setups that actually cost as much as my apartment flat and create holographic imaging thats almost lifesize (for small scale band performances - maybe not lifesize for full orchestral performances)
I suppose it also depends on the music you listen to as well - with the music i listen to headphones are the worst thing around and cannot in any way compare to a proper hi-fi in a full size room (maybe the hi-fi's you listened to were restricted by the smaller rooms you find in England - here in South Africa most people who have great Hi-fi manage to put them into rooms that are large enough to draw the best out of them hence why i feel that headphones can come absolutely nowher near the performance levels of good hi-fi besides maybe for having marginally better tonality and dynamics because of its intimate near field nature - but a performer is never standing on the top of my head or even standing face to face at one foot away during a live performance so how can a set of headphones seem realistic
You obviously did not do a degree in diplomacy 
but I have to agree that IMO there is not a pair of headphones made that can compare to a good Hifi system with full range speakers in a room with good acoustics .
I only use headphones when on the move and I am always very careful with the volume level because it is very easy to damage your hearing without realizing it which is another reason I don't like headphones much , especially in ear ones 
I only use headphones when on the move
Gosh, I should really do that instead of taking my speakers on the train
high fidelity (hi-fi for short) is defined as (according to websters) - the reproduction of an effect (as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original
. . .sure it may be marginally better tonally or it may be marginally more dynamic
So... that would be a more accurate reproduction then. It's silly to say headphones can't be hifi. It's just different. Each to their own, and some to both.
Whats wrong with headphones 
Nothing at all, just some bloke that can't understand the concept. Nothing to see here, etc.
yep - im the one throwing my "degrees" around to bully people into my way of thinking
true enough, but when blunt statements are made they deserve equally blunt responses
agreed, and i suppose it helps when your reference point to hi-fi is not a pair of Wharfedale 9.1's (cue the inevitable "i have also listened to everything on B&W 800 diamonds" claim next) 
yep - you really need to hear high fidelity music on a moving train and you also need to wear your headphones and listen to music while walking in the street - if i had a quid for everytime i missed to knock over some idiot wearing headphones and walking across an intersection without looking at traffic lights cos he was busy listening to his headphones with an ipod or phone i would be able to probably afford those 800 diamonds i mentioned above
Whats wrong with headphones
I dunno, I now regret talking about Hifi, headphones ........ Degrees or anything in particular. I like coming to the forum to discuss a subject that I have had a great interest in. Its just such a real shame that people have to be 1. so agressive and 2, Troll to get a rise and annoy people.
Getting over the imaging/soundstageing aspect headphones offer great fidelity, no room interaction, no crossover and 20-20 capability, what speakers do that?
Whats wrong with headphones
I dunno, I now regret talking about Hifi, headphones ........ Degrees or anything in particular. I like coming to the forum to discuss a subject that I have had a great interest in. Its just such a real shame that people have to be 1. so agressive and 2, Troll to get a rise and annoy people.
Some could be PC etiquette which can be tricky for newby [i know] but agressivness is another matter 
let us analyze this statement here
Yes, lets!
high fidelity (hi-fi for short) is defined as (according to websters) - the reproduction of an effect (as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original
On the page with this so far.
link for you in case you cannot find it
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/high+fidelity?show=0&t=1333572746
That's okay, I'll take your word for it...
so how does a tiny man sitting on top of ones head relate to a sense of high fidelity - in fact listening to headphones is so narrow and small that it never can be likened or related to hearing the "real" thing
Er, you're getting this slightly wrong. You're taking the physical size against the capability of the headphone design, the source and the recording quality to deliver an accurate representation of the recorded or live piece. In my experience, if they are well designed and well engineered, they'll deliver.
sure it may be marginally better tonally or it may be marginally more dynamic but a guitar is not a 2 inch square sized instrument - so in fact a pair of headphones is a failure TO ME in relation to the definition of high fidelity itself
Right, so you accept headphones have the potential to be better tonally and dynamically. Nobody's said the guitar is anything but a full-size thing. And of course, it's your opinion, so that's fine too.
and pardon me if i fail to wax lyrical or seem to have a lack of respect for modern sound engineers who to me are the people who are responsible for the direction that modern recordings are taking ie does the term "loudness wars" ring any bells - yes .... i admit that there probably are good sound engineers out there that actually may be worth more than the paper their degree is printed on but they wont really be butchering recordings by catering toward the "ipod generation" with their in-ear headphones who only care how loud things are and not whether a recording actually sounds real or not
Yes, there are some very fine mastering engineers out there, my own favourites being Barry Diament, Joe Gastwirt and Bernie Grundman. As it happens, I use a 32Gb iPod Touch with a bunch of WAV files and high quality Spotify with Sennheiser CX300-IIs. It's a very fine combination and excellent for faithful audio reproduction.
Maybe I should rephrase this comment.
Apart from lacking a proper stereo image and not being able to 'feel' the bass my portable MP3 player and IEM's sound just as good as ATC's top of the range active speakers.
I've heard top of the range open backed 'on-ear' headphones that sound even better too.
Have you ever tried Comply foam tips? They're great because they block out most of the external noise which allows you to comfortably listen to your music at a much lower volume level.
I now also feel so pitiful and worthless because I only have a rubbish pair of Wharfedale Diamond 9.1's . I wonder when I will be able to afford a proper grown up pair....... hmm .
- Login to post comments
guy ... i could care less about your degree - your words tell me that you probably slept through the relevant lectures IMHO because headphones is the worst way to listen to your music in my opinion - as i have said the experience may have minor advantages in certain aspects but they absolutely lack in lots of aspects that i hold dear and i dont need a degree to tell me that
does it mean you need a degree to appreciate music - do you even need a degree to know about anything - i suppose next you will be telling me you need a degree to enjoy sex too .... well i truly think you can put that degree where the sun dont shine for all i care about it, because it isnt relevant to how pathetic IMHO headphones really are in the context of Hi fidelity audio listening
what a joy you are!