These audio discussions always amaze and amuse me. I am not trying to be condescending or arrogant or anything like that. But audiophile quality electronics was my first love in consumer electronics - going back to the early 1970s. But note I was just an enlisted man in the USAF for 24 years. In other words, never "flush" with cash. But note just the left-front speaker in my current stereo system (part of my surround sound home theater system) would cost over $1400 in today's dollars. And understand that is
not a powered speaker. Preamps and amps are separate. So is the right-front speaker.
Most 2.1 computer speaker systems today cost well under $300 and that is for the left speaker, right speaker and subwoofer too. AND that includes all the electronics (preamps and final amps) to drive those speakers.
Understand, in terms of high end audio, that $1400 for just one speaker is a fortune for me, but in reality, is chump change! So for sure, I am not bragging. I am just trying to put expectations back closer to reality.
Some people arent so sensitive to differences so they cant tell
This is so true. And I note age plays a HUGE role in this. It is just a fact of life that our (we humans) hearing begins to degrade between 18 and 40 years of age, then keeps going down hill from there.
That does NOT mean we older people enjoy music less. We are still able to discern quality sound from noise and distortion - just not at the highest (and some times lowest) frequencies and SPLs (sound pressure levels or loudness).
For me its less noticeable in speakers vs my headphones.
Which clearly suggests your headphones reproduce audio of a higher quality than your speakers - a testament to headphone and other tiny speaker technologies of today.
How we listen plays a HUGE factor is how we enjoy the audio. Listening to the "soundtrack" while we play a game or watch a movie is WAY DIFFERENT to just listening to music. And listening to music as "background" music while doing other computer tasks is WAY DIFFERENT again.
I watched the original Top Gun the other day. I assure you, listening to Danger Zone by Kenny Loggins while watching the movie was amazing. But just listening to Danger Zone, eyes closed and concentrating on the projected soundstage was even more amazing.
I splurged and have a nice $400 THX certified surround sound system on this computer. And it does sound great when listening to hi-res audio tunes while using the computer for things like posting posts in forums. And they are great for gaming soundtracks. But for entertainment watching movies, or serious listening, no way.
I must also point out that computer speaker systems (and most headphones) do NOT meet audiophile audio reproduction standards. That is, they do NOT have a "flat" frequency response across their entire range and that is
by design. They tend to emphasize LFEs (low frequency events) to make explosions, for example, sound more... ...explosive! Or they boost the treble (high frequencies) to make those frequency sound more bright. These are not criticisms, just observations. If the listeners like what they hear, then who am I to say what's right? Now the artists and sound engineers who made the original recordings might have something to say about the "faithfulness" of the reproduced sound, but they are not in this discussion today.
Bottom line - there are too many variables for any of us to say what is best (or good enough) for you. What is satisfactory for us as individuals is very much subjective. It is also very much dependent on the speakers (and electronics), the listening habits of the user, room acoustics, and of course, the sound source itself.