Audition is spatial, but not in the way that vision is. We can hear where something is in relation to our location but, unlike vision, do not seem to hear voluminous, three-dimensional objects laid out across a structured perceptual field. However, this does not mean that spatial hearing is simply an inferior version of spatial vision. In this chapter we will consider various controversies concerning the objects and structure of spatial audition, and in doing so will demonstrate its richness and uniqueness. The first question regarding audition's objects concerns the relation between sounds and sources. If sounds are identified with waves in the surrounding medium, one has to explain why they are typically heard at or near their sources. If sounds are located at their sources, the question becomes whether what is heard in space is the source itself, an event involving the source, or the sound produced by that event. The question of auditory objects also extends to cases in which what is heard does not seem to be a sounding object. Reverberation raises the possibility that we hear the size of the room we are in. Silence raises a different issue: if silence is heard rather than inferred, then we need to ask whether it is heard in space, or whether it is itself a way in which empty space is heard. The second question concerns the structure of auditory space. One issue is whether audition involves an auditory field. This question cannot be settled by presupposing that a perceptual field must be visual in form. The issue is whether audition yields a spatial field, or whether what looks like spatial structure in auditory experience is in fact the upshot of how sources, events, and acoustic environments are heard individually. The chapter concludes that questions concerning the objects of spatial hearing must be answered before questions of structure. Without an account of what is heard, it is not possible to explain how spatial hearing is structured at all.