AirPods 2 With Grip Coating and AirPower Said to Launch This Spring

[PickUrPoison]

If Apple does raise the price for the second Gen AirPods, it’s possible they could retain the first Gen AirPods to off-set an option to the consumer for a ‘Cheaper’ model, if they don’t raise the raise the price for the second Gen AirPods And They start at $160.00, there is _zero_ logic to keep the first Gen AirPods in their line up. It depends on whatever these Gen 2 Airpods offer in tech/features.

That makes sense. It’s what they’ve been doing with Apple Watch. Recently with MacBook Air and iPad Pro as well, i.e. introduce a new model with better specs at a higher price, but keep selling the older model at its original price.

 

[twolf2919]

What are you doing to them? When new I was getting 4 hours at medium volume, easily.

Not sure! It might have been more than 2 hours initially - it's been awhile - but definitely never 4. And now I get the battery warning around the hour mark. A year ago, I accidentally washed my jeans with AirPods in them. The case was toast - had to get a new one - but the AirPods were fine. Maybe that affected their performance - although I'm not sure how.

 

[jpep]

New design? Conflicting reports on if it's a new design or the same design with just internal differences?

 

[twolf2919]

I just wanted to say I am impressed on how you have summed that up... this is extremely true. Its the idea in the head of the consumer...

I don't agree. Most people buy products based on their perceived needs. As with most things in life, they weigh pros and cons. Folks who buy AirPods don't "vehemently defend its sound quality" - they "vehemently defend the idea that a headphone purchase decision has many dimensions, not just one! Those who are complaining about the AirPod's sound quality simply refuse to accept that there are - lots of - folks out there who think AirPod sound quality is perfectly acceptable given all its other positive attributes.
[doublepost=1549953610][/doublepost]

If you're paying $170 for a pile of **** knowingly, does it change the fact that it still stinks?

How is this relevant - other than to show your mental maturity?
[doublepost=1549954047][/doublepost]

Every time I see someone vehemently defending airpods' sound quality, I wonder if they have ever tried a pair of non-Apple headphones of similar price. But as I teach in my business strategy course, product differentiation is based on customer perception not reality.

For someone who teaches, you sure have a limited view of reality & economics. Folks who bought AirPods aren't vehemently defending the headphone's sound quality - they're defending the right to purchase a product that fulfills *all* their needs, not just audio fidelity. And they've deemed the sound adequate, given its other positive attributes.

It's pretty immature/naive to compare $160 wireless earbuds to wired or professional headphones just on the basis of sound and price. Show me a single audiophile level product that is wireless, comes with its own charging case, connects to your device with ZERO effort....that sells for $160. Sure, you may not place much importance on the non-audio aspects of your future headphones - but obviously many others do!

 

[Skiefire]

A 40% price hike? I hope they get booed during the conference if that’s true.

 

[CarlJ]

Wish they had an in ear version with silicone tips

I wish they offered a modified model engineered for use with custom earmolds. Cut down the ergonomic shape a touch, in order to provide purchase for an external silicone piece to attach (add some ridges/rings), and provide a case with a bit more space in the case for the custom molded earpieces to fit while still attached. I would love this so much!

 

[michaelant]

Earwax will show up nicely on that matte black.

I'll take a pair of earwax-colored AirPods, thanks.

 

[ChristianVirtual]

Not sure if once again; I like them but get increasing complains about sound leak. On the other side at 50% they are just not enough.

Any other alternative similar with less sound leak !

 

[Vjosullivan]

----- -----

 

[PickUrPoison]

A 40% price hike? I hope they get booed during the conference if that’s true.

The rumor, from someone who wouldn’t have the slightest knowledge of Apple’s actual pricing plan, is 25%.

Given they can’t seem to keep them in stock at $159, an increase wouldn’t surprise me. It also depends on new features, including the wireless charging case.

 

[riker1384]

Of course AirPods do not have a low bass response, it would be pointless to have as you cannot hear it, you feel it from the huge speakers on decent loud volume.

This is false. People can hear down to about 20 Hz whereas the Airpods start rolling off at about 100 Hz. There is almost no music that has bass that you "cannot hear". That generally only comes up in movie sound effects. But there is a lot of musical content in the 30-80 Hz range where the Airpods are weak.

 

[Scottsoapbox]

Every time I see someone vehemently defending airpods' sound quality, I wonder if they have ever tried a pair of non-Apple headphones of similar price. But as I teach in my business strategy course, product differentiation is based on customer perception not reality.

For someone who teaches, you sure have a limited view of reality & economics. Folks who bought AirPods aren't vehemently defending the headphone's sound quality - they're defending the right to purchase a product that fulfills *all* their needs, not just audio fidelity. And they've deemed the sound adequate, given its other positive attributes.

It's pretty immature/naive to compare $160 wireless earbuds to wired or professional headphones just on the basis of sound and price. Show me a single audiophile level product that is wireless, comes with its own charging case, connects to your device with ZERO effort....that sells for $160. Sure, you may not place much importance on the non-audio aspects of your future headphones - but obviously many others do!

Yes please explain economics to someone with a PhD in it.

Here is a free lesson. Let's count the errors in your response:

1. This is a comment specifically about people "vehemently defending airpods' sound quality" thus commenting about people that don't do this is related i.e., another conversation.
2. Projecting your own feelings on all people that bought airpods.
3. I don't mention wired headphones.
4. I don't mention "pro" headphones.
5. People will argue about the exact threshold but entry-level "pro" wired headphones start around $350 (or more depending on your definition of "pro") not $160
   
6. It is neither immature or naive to focus on specific attributes germane to the point being made. It's called clarity. Just because you can come up with reasons someone might buy airpods other than sound quality in no way changes a discussion about the sound quality of airpods.
7. There are many wireless headphones with better sound quality for around the same price as airpods. For instance, Bose makes a pair for $150 (and since you can't let go other features it includes extra non-sound quality features such as noise canceling technology, comfortable silicon tips, and one touch pairing - gasp! non-Apple products can do that too?!)
   
8. Projecting your own feelings the relative importance of features on most people.

What is immature is feeling personally attacked when someone doesn't like a product that you like. If you are happy with your purchase: be happy.

 

[Marzel]

For what they are? $170 earphones with garbage sound are now acceptable?

Sennheiser is crying in the corner.

For what they are, they are among the cheapest options on the market. Not many pairs come even close to the functionality that AirPods provide, and are actually more expensive.

 

[0947347]

This is false. People can hear down to about 20 Hz whereas the Airpods start rolling off at about 100 Hz. There is almost no music that has bass that you "cannot hear". That generally only comes up in movie sound effects. But there is a lot of musical content in the 30-80 Hz range where the Airpods are weak.

Actually, most of the modern music is between 90
- 250 hz, and AirPods lows are about 64 hz.

20-60 hz AKA sub bass. Sub bass is easy to feel, that is why when you visit the drum’n’bass party, or a live of somebody like Tipper, the drives are shaking and feels very pleasant to be close to speaker as you can feel the low frequencies on your body, shaking the room.
Yet, sub bass is very tricky and a bad mix of sub bass can seriously damage your speakers.

This conversation is about ear buds, not studio monitoring nor DJ cans.

Can they be better? Anything can be better, period.

Are they decent enough? Yes, for people who follow their ears over technical graph

 

[twolf2919]

Improved battery life would be definitely be a design improvement and nose cancelling would definitely be audio performance related. I still can't think how an improvement could happen unless by design

That's why your response wasn't entirely necessary - obviously every improvement is a design change, if you use the broadest meaning of the word. When I responded, it was witeh the understanding that the OP meant *physical* design. As far as noise cancelling improving audio performance: strictly speaking it does not improve audio performance at all - it simply attempts to eliminate noise that would detract from what the "performers" (the speakers) produce.
[doublepost=1550143984][/doublepost]

Yes please explain economics to someone with a PhD in it.

Here is a free lesson. Let's count the errors in your response:

1. This is a comment specifically about people "vehemently defending airpods' sound quality" thus commenting about people that don't do this is related i.e., another conversation.
2. Projecting your own feelings on all people that bought airpods.
3. I don't mention wired headphones.
4. I don't mention "pro" headphones.
5. People will argue about the exact threshold but entry-level "pro" wired headphones start around $350 (or more depending on your definition of "pro") not $160
   
6. It is neither immature or naive to focus on specific attributes germane to the point being made. It's called clarity. Just because you can come up with reasons someone might buy airpods other than sound quality in no way changes a discussion about the sound quality of airpods.
7. There are many wireless headphones with better sound quality for around the same price as airpods. For instance, Bose makes a pair for $150 (and since you can't let go other features it includes extra non-sound quality features such as noise canceling technology, comfortable silicon tips, and one touch pairing - gasp! non-Apple products can do that too?!)
   
8. Projecting your own feelings the relative importance of features on most people.

What is immature is feeling personally attacked when someone doesn't like a product that you like. If you are happy with your purchase: be happy.

I wasn't trying to teach economics. If, indeed, you have a PhD in that subject, your "free lesson" sure wasn't a show case for your education. Let me rebut your points:

1. Initially I thought you were one of those who make unfair (apples-to-oranges) comparisons - thus my assumptions about what you might have been comparing to. Now I think you just made up a strawman argument when you speak of people who vehemently defend airpods' sound quality". Nobody in their right mind would suggest AirPods have great sound quality without qualifying it with its other attributes.
2. See first response. I assumed the wrong motive on your part.
3. See first response. Since what I assumed was incorrect, my examples were too.
4. See last response.
5. whatever. I didn't try to define "pro" - just any headphone who's main purpose is good sound reproduction.
6. True - but I say you're making up a fact when stating that there are people vehemently defending AirPods sound quality!
7. AirPods have zero touch pairing. There are lots of other attributes I could mention.
8. I guess it's up to other readers to decide who's projecting.

I don't feel personally attacked when someone doesn't like a product that I like. Now it is you that is projecting. I generally only respond to posts when I feel the poster is misleading folks. I think your post qualified. I still do.

 

[Mac 128]

This is false. People can hear down to about 20 Hz whereas the Airpods start rolling off at about 100 Hz. There is almost no music that has bass that you "cannot hear". That generally only comes up in movie sound effects. But there is a lot of musical content in the 30-80 Hz range where the Airpods are weak.