Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Adds 'Anti-Beats' Master & Dynamic Headphones to its Online Store, Proves Open to Competition

tmoerel said:
Sure... that is the reason most studios record in high bitrate DIGITAL. Once you have converted analog to digital you stop degradation of sound. In analog though each step in the mixing process will add noise, distortion, etc.

Sorry but Analog Audio is a bit like Film Photography : Dying out and fast on its way to extinction.
Click to expand...

Wow! So much cluelessness in this post I don't even know where to begin...

First, yeah, they said Analog Audio and Film Photography was dying out fast over 15 years ago... but because you've obviously been out of touch, you haven't noticed the huge resurgence of Analog (both in Audio and Photography.)

Analog has made a huge comeback in music with companies like Korg releasing several new Analog synths, Moog releasing one of their greatest new Analog synths and hundreds of new analog Modular synth companies making thousands of new analog modules (yes, those huge wall of modular synths you may have seen back in the late 1960s to early 1970s... they've made a huge comeback! Bigger than ever.) There was even a recent documentary about the new analog modular craze. And in fact, because of this, Moog has even redesigned and released their $150,000 Moog Modular as used by Keith Emerson.

And speaking of documentaries people like Dave Grohl of the Foo Fighters (not really a fan, but) not only made a documentary about analog recording with his film Sound City, but now has his own TV series on HBO called Sonic Highways all about analog recording in the top studios around the country.

Why is this? Because after the past couple of decades of Digital recording at 24bit/192kHz with the top of the line Pro Tools systems, people realized they can't emulate that nice, warm tape saturated sound of analog (what you so naively called "noise, distortion, etc.")

I'm not going to get into the technicality of it all because it will obviously be over your head based on your previous statement, but in short, with Digital, you can degrade the sound in a number of ways (compression, generation loss, bit reduction errors, etc.)

Also, you can't record hot, otherwise you will introduce digital errors (i.e., bad digital distortion) but with analog, you can, which introduces nice warm, smooth analog distortion... what everyone has been trying to emulate with digital plug-ins the last few years. And now because of this, most of the major studios are going back to recording to tape, as are many new indie bands. (Google it. You'll see the resurgence of both reel-to-reel tape machines as well as cassette, not to mention the recent resurgence of vinyl records.)

Man I could go on and on, but I am late and am trying to hurry through this... just do a small bit of research before making dumb statements like "Sorry but Analog Audio is a bit like Film Photography : Dying out and fast on its way to extinction." People have been saying that over and over for years, but it's all made a comeback... and for good reason!

Same with photography, film is making a huge comeback, and not just 35mm, but Medium Format. Everything from Holgas to Hasselblads. Research it, I'm not going to spoon feed you...
 
Last edited:
There are so many other headphone producers out there other than Bose or Beats. Many in my crew perfer Sony or (the real snobs) wear Sennheiser's. Some of the Sennheiser top end models go for up to $1500.
 
the $349 and $399 Master & Dynamic headphones focus on both design and high-quality audio, much like Beats.
Click to expand...

This made me laugh, referencing beats as being "high-quality audio"
 
lostngone said:
Fair enough.... But have you ever tried Masters & Dynamics, Bang & Olufsen, Bowers & Wilkins or my favorite Aedle?
Click to expand...

Yes to Bang & Olufsen and Bowers & Wilkins. Have personal experience with both. No to the other two.
 
Still my favorites....

Audio-Technica ATH-M50x

ath_m50x_2_sq.jpg
 
infowarfare said:
Wow! So much cluelessness in this post I don't even know where to begin...

First, yeah, they said Analog Audio and Film Photography was dying out fast over 15 years ago... but because you've obviously been out of touch, you haven't noticed the huge resurgence of Analog (both in Audio and Photography.)

Analog has made a huge comeback in music with companies like Korg releasing several new Analog synths, Moog releasing one of their greatest new Analog synths and hundreds of new analog Modular synth companies making thousands of new analog modules (yes, those huge wall of modular synths you may have seen back in the late 1960s to early 1970s... they've made a huge comeback! Bigger than ever.) There was even a recent documentary about the new analog modular craze. And in fact, because of this, Moog has even redesigned and released their $150,000 Moog Modular as used by Keith Emerson.

And speaking of documentaries people like Dave Grohl of the Foo Fighters (not really a fan, but) not only made a documentary about analog recording with his film Sound City, but now has his own TV series on HBO called Sonic Highways all about analog recording in the top studios around the country.

Why is this? Because after the past couple of decades of Digital recording at 24bit/192kHz with the top of the line Pro Tools systems, people realized they can't emulate that nice, warm tape saturated sound of analog (what you so naively called "noise, distortion, etc.")

I'm not going to get into the technicality of it all because it will obviously be over your head based on your previous statement, but in short, with Digital, you can degrade the sound in a number of ways (compression, generation loss, bit reduction errors, etc.)

Also, you can't record hot, otherwise you will introduce digital errors (i.e., bad digital distortion) but with analog, you can, which introduces nice warm, smooth analog distortion... what everyone has been trying to emulate with digital plug-ins the last few years. And now because of this, most of the major studios are going back to recording to tape, as are many new indie bands. (Google it. You'll see the resurgence of both reel-to-reel tape machines as well as cassette, not to mention the recent resurgence of vinyl records.)

Man I could go on and on, but I am late and am trying to hurry through this... just do a small bit of research before making dumb statements like "Sorry but Analog Audio is a bit like Film Photography : Dying out and fast on its way to extinction." People have been saying that over and over for years, but it's all made a comeback... and for good reason!

Same with photography, film is making a huge comeback, and not just 35mm, but Medium Format. Everything from Holgas to Hasselblads. Research it, I'm not going to spoon feed you...
Click to expand...
"film is making a huge comeback".

Let me know when they resurrect Kodachrome. The environmental cost of film has always been high, capturing light with chemical compounds was a noble effort, but it's heyday is past. Try getting quality 2 hour turnaround on 2-1/4 transparency film these days. It used to be no problem.

Holgas, Hasselblads? Most images will be digitally processed and modified at some point, why add more materials & hardware into the workflow. You load a bunch of film backs and 4x5 holders and get things back scratched, from the lab, and tell me how great film is.

And, there's nothing wrong with Foo Fighters (no "the") or Dave, at least they don't force their albums down your throat, and I don't see many bands cooking up anything half as interesting as the projects you mention above.
 
iososx said:
Lately Apple is the picture of uncertainty, inconsistency, and never fails to demonstrate their commitment to hypocrisy as always. More and more they're acting like mainstream politicians. :)
Click to expand...

So just out of curiosity, what is the uncertainty, hypocrisy, or inconsistency here?
 
Larry-K said:
"film is making a huge comeback".

Let me know when they resurrect Kodachrome. The environmental cost of film has always been high, capturing light with chemical compounds was a noble effort, but it's heyday is past. Try getting quality 2 hour turnaround on 2-1/4 transparency film these days. It used to be no problem.

Holgas, Hasselblads? Most images will be digitally processed and modified at some point, why add more materials & hardware into the workflow. You load a bunch of film backs and 4x5 holders and get things back scratched, from the lab, and tell me how great film is.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what you think or what your "opinion" is, the fact of the matter is, yes, film is making a comeback. Sure, film has had it's "heyday" but deny it all you want, it HAS made a comeback. Not my opinion, it is the facts. Even when Polaroid decided to stop making film, the Impossible Project bought the factories and started making a whole new line of Polaroid film because the demand was so high. And they are doing well with it. (Fujifilm are also still making film and even a new Medium Format film camera!)

Again, not my opinion, these are the facts, as much as you may want to deny it or not understand it (and yes, people do like the aesthetic quality of shooting on film for a reason, again, as much as you may not understand why. And if you are shooting 4x5, you should be smart enough to develop your own film instead of sending it out to a lab... at least I do. Though to be honest, I do send my Medium Format film out to a lab and never had a problem.)

Larry-K said:
And, there's nothing wrong with Foo Fighters (no "the") or Dave, at least they don't force their albums down your throat, and I don't see many bands cooking up anything half as interesting as the projects you mention above.
Click to expand...

Never said there was anything wrong with the Foo Fighters, just not my cup of tea. But my point was, people DO like them and they themselves [Foo Fighters] are champions of analog recording, which gives me new respect for them.

See, in case you missed my whole point, I support analog film and analog audio, and was trying to explain (to the poor chap who claimed analog will soon be extinct, something they've been saying for quite a long while now) that not only is there still interest in both, that there has been a resurgence... not my opinion, but fact. Proof being, synth manufacturers again making hardware analog synths (I provided links) after seeing the past decade of everyone using mostly software synths (I'm in the industry, so I know) a currently popular band (again, Foo Fighters) recording and making TV shows about analog recording... and here you come basically calling me a Foo Fighters basher because I used them as an example of champions of a medium that I happen to also support!? Amazing the comprehension skills of some of you here... :rolleyes:

EDIT: Actually, the more I think about it, this whole thing really pisses me off! I tried to make my initial post so clear and fairly well thought out, providing links and explanations, only to have someone like you come in with conjecture and personal bias and the conclusion that I must be a Foo Fighters hater therefore analog film has not made a comeback because it's too hard [for you] and film labs scratch 4x5 film!?

Typical internet forum; someone can't comprehend why something exists because they themselves don't use it anymore, so they deny it's existence, and state it as a matter of fact, despite being given proof of said existing thing's popularity... boggles the mind!
 
Last edited:
infowarfare said:
See, in case you missed my whole point, I support analog film and analog audio, and was trying to explain (to the poor chap who claimed analog will soon be extinct, something they've been saying for quite a long while now) that not only is there still interest in both, that there has been a resurgence... not my opinion, but fact. Proof being, synth manufacturers again making hardware analog synths (I provided links) after seeing the past decade of everyone using mostly software synths (I'm in the industry, so I know) a currently popular band (again, Foo Fighters) recording and making TV shows about analog recording... and here you come basically calling me a Foo Fighters basher because I used them as an example of champions of a medium that I happen to also support!? Amazing the comprehension skills of some of you here... :rolleyes:

EDIT: Actually, the more I think about it, this whole thing really pisses me off! I tried to make my initial post so clear and fairly well thought out, providing links and explanations, only to have someone like you come in with conjecture and personal bias and the conclusion that I must be a Foo Fighters hater therefore analog film has not made a comeback because it's too hard [for you] and film labs scratch 4x5 film!?

Typical internet forum; someone can't comprehend why something exists because they themselves don't use it anymore, so they deny it's existence, and state it as a matter of fact, despite being given proof of said existing thing's popularity... boggles the mind!
Click to expand...

I was going to leave this, because I didn't really see how analogue vs digital had anything to do with Beats, but now that you're calling people out here on their lack of comprehension, I think some further explanation from someone else might help...

There is a connection here. First, the people who like Beats headphones frequently talk about how they "like" the extra bass, and how sound is all subjective anyway. It isn't. The aim of sound reproduction is just that, reproduction. Lack of colouration, whether in a microphone, amplifier, speaker or headphone, is what one strives for. Flat frequency response is the aim, so that what you hear in playback is as close to the original sound as possible. In this respect digital recording is way ahead of any analogue format or technique.

Your argument is all about what people like in a sound, and the warmth that some analogue techniques introduce. Fair enough, if you're creating the sound: yes, analogue synthesisers have their place, and many people far prefer them to their digital counterparts (I certainly have a soft spot for many analogue synths). In much the same way many prefer an acoustic guitar to an electric one: they may share the same name, they may share similar playing techniques, but ultimately they're very different instruments. In both cases though they are being used to create original art, and therefore one's personal preference is entirely valid. Likewise, film vs digital photography is about creating art: while some of us may want something that simply recreates the scene we see in front of us as accurately as possible (and again, digital photography wins out there) most high-end photographers are manipulating the reality they see to create something greater, and here I can see that film still absolutely has a place.

Last night I was conducting an orchestra in concert. That concert was recorded, on fairly decent digital equipment, using four microphones that between them cost over £10,000. Now, I've not yet heard the playback, but what I'm hoping to hear is a faithful reproduction of the experience a member of the audience would have had. Of course there will be limitations: the microphones aren't perfect, and even if they were, their placement will affect very significantly the balance one acquires. But still, the aim is to record as much of the original sound as accurately as possible, and to do that I'm afraid digital is the way to go. I don't know of any recording engineer of classical, or indeed any non-studio or live music, who would champion analogue recording over digital.

Headphones, as well as the recording medium driving them, have no place intentionally altering the sound that the artist has devised. A visual artist, be they Constable or Ansel Adams, would be horrified if they heard that someone was recommending all their work be seen through amber sunglasses. Analogue recording is the analogue (haha) of this. Sure, Foo Fighters enjoy recording in analogue, and that's fine, it's part of their artistic process, but once it comes out of the studio, I expect they would prefer it to be heard by their fans as they heard it. That's likely to mean digital reproduction, and better headphones than Beats produce.

That's a long wall of text I know, but I hope it makes sense.
 
infowarfare said:
Doesn't matter what you think or what your "opinion" is, the fact of the matter is, yes, film is making a comeback. Sure, film has had it's "heyday" but deny it all you want, it HAS made a comeback. Not my opinion, it is the facts. Even when Polaroid decided to stop making film, the Impossible Project bought the factories and started making a whole new line of Polaroid film because the demand was so high. And they are doing well with it. (Fujifilm are also still making film and even a new Medium Format film camera!)

Again, not my opinion, these are the facts, as much as you may want to deny it or not understand it (and yes, people do like the aesthetic quality of shooting on film for a reason, again, as much as you may not understand why. And if you are shooting 4x5, you should be smart enough to develop your own film instead of sending it out to a lab... at least I do. Though to be honest, I do send my Medium Format film out to a lab and never had a problem.)

Never said there was anything wrong with the Foo Fighters, just not my cup of tea. But my point was, people DO like them and they themselves [Foo Fighters] are champions of analog recording, which gives me new respect for them.

See, in case you missed my whole point, I support analog film and analog audio, and was trying to explain (to the poor chap who claimed analog will soon be extinct, something they've been saying for quite a long while now) that not only is there still interest in both, that there has been a resurgence... not my opinion, but fact. Proof being, synth manufacturers again making hardware analog synths (I provided links) after seeing the past decade of everyone using mostly software synths (I'm in the industry, so I know) a currently popular band (again, Foo Fighters) recording and making TV shows about analog recording... and here you come basically calling me a Foo Fighters basher because I used them as an example of champions of a medium that I happen to also support!? Amazing the comprehension skills of some of you here... :rolleyes:

EDIT: Actually, the more I think about it, this whole thing really pisses me off! I tried to make my initial post so clear and fairly well thought out, providing links and explanations, only to have someone like you come in with conjecture and personal bias and the conclusion that I must be a Foo Fighters hater therefore analog film has not made a comeback because it's too hard [for you] and film labs scratch 4x5 film!?

Typical internet forum; someone can't comprehend why something exists because they themselves don't use it anymore, so they deny it's existence, and state it as a matter of fact, despite being given proof of said existing thing's popularity... boggles the mind!
Click to expand...
Sorry you're so bent out of shape over reality, but it's pretty clear you've never processed film on a commercial scale or you wouldn't recommend I process my own sheet film, and anyone who's run sheet or roll film at any appreciable quantities has had lab screwups at one time or another.

It's also pretty clear you don't know that even the bases for film are being discontinued, and that what little remains of film production is nothing compared to what it was a decade ago. Ask the original Polaroid company how they're doing, and you might check in on Kodak while you're at it.

A "Comeback" is not one roll film camera (check the origin date on that model) and a cute trend. You can bark all you want, but anybody who can't get a decent photo out of current digital technology is probably incompetent.

Here's a link for you:
http://petapixel.com/2014/08/25/fujifilm-to-discontinue-its-medium-format-gf670-folding-rangefinder/
That medium format camera you mentioned is deader than Marley, and it was never one of Fuji's more sophisticated models anyway, it's on "Backorder", but it's not coming back, neither is film.
 
*devil's advocate* Because people who want music to sound great strictly want headphones to resemble their dining room furniture.
 
My god you people, the comprehension level... where to begin...

Poisednoise said:
I was going to leave this, because I didn't really see how analogue vs digital had anything to do with Beats, but now that you're calling people out here on their lack of comprehension, I think some further explanation from someone else might help...

There is a connection here. First, the people who like Beats headphones frequently talk about how they "like" the extra bass, and how sound is all subjective anyway. It isn't. The aim of sound reproduction is just that, reproduction. Lack of colouration, whether in a microphone, amplifier, speaker or headphone, is what one strives for. Flat frequency response is the aim, so that what you hear in playback is as close to the original sound as possible. In this respect digital recording is way ahead of any analogue format or technique.

Your argument is all about what people like in a sound, and the warmth that some analogue techniques introduce. Fair enough, if you're creating the sound: yes, analogue synthesisers have their place, and many people far prefer them to their digital counterparts (I certainly have a soft spot for many analogue synths).

<snip>

Headphones, as well as the recording medium driving them, have no place intentionally altering the sound that the artist has devised. <snip>
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you say, and none of it matters... because again, you missed my whole point.

First, my initial point was, this is a non story by a hack writer here on Macrumors. As I posted previously:

infowarfare said:
Headline: Apple Adds 'Anti-Beats' Master & Dynamic Headphones to its Online Store, Proves Open to Competition

Last Paragraph: In addition to adding new headphones from competing brand Master & Dynamic, the company continues to sell a range of other headphones from companies like Bowers & Wilkins, Alpine, Parrot, SMS Audio, Marshall, Denon, Sennheiser, and more.

Result: NON-STORY.
Click to expand...

Then, someone mentioned that analog was dying and will be extinct, and all I did; ALL I DID, was point out that not only is is not dying, it's making a comeback because people like the sound (and look/process, in the case of film) of analog, and I gave links to back up my claims. That's all. Nothing more. Didn't claim analog was better than digital, didn't say "Beats was da bomb" (I wouldn't be caught dead with beats headphones; I've been using the industry standard Sony MDR 7506s for almost 20 years... not the best, but they work for my needs.)

So again, to clarify and simplify, my points are:

1. This was a non-story to begin with because Apple Online has always sold other competing headphones even after they acquired Beats, so adding one more to the line up is not much of a story, especially when you start the story with "they are finally allowing competition" and then end with, "but they also continue to sell all the other competition they've always sold".

and

2. Digital is great. Digital is the best. But some people like analog... so much so, that it's making a comeback.

Period. That's all my argument was. How can anyone not get that?


Larry-K said:
Sorry you're so bent out of shape over reality, but it's pretty clear you've never processed film on a commercial scale or you wouldn't recommend I process my own sheet film, and anyone who's run sheet or roll film at any appreciable quantities has had lab screwups at one time or another.

<snip>

You can bark all you want, but anybody who can't get a decent photo out of current digital technology is probably incompetent.
Click to expand...

And as for you... again, yes, Film has had it's heyday, but 10 years ago it was, and should have been, completely dead in the water... and yet... Impossible Project, an uprising of analog film blogs, numerous people both amateur and professionals shooting film again, new film cameras being made (though I didn't realize Fujifilm stopped production already with theirs, but let's see if they make another model, I know others are and have recently.) I gave some proof and also said very clearly that I'm not going to spoon feed you people, it's easy enough to research this stuff on your own.

But again, if I am wrong, if film is not making a comeback, why is Lomography so popular these days? Why are they popping up more and more actual stores selling film and film cameras exclusively? 8 years ago they were online only, now they have 20 stores worldwide plus their film and cameras selling in other camera stores (such as Samy's in Los Angeles or all of the Urban Outfitters stores everywhere!) And why has the Impossible Project continued where Polaroid left off? Why would they bother?

What ever your excuse is for why this is happening, my whole point is... IT IS HAPPENING. And again, the only reason I'm having to bark, is because some of you are in such denial. You once again just can't comprehend why anyone would not just shoot digital... well let me put it this way, to throw it back at you.... any monkey and his uncle can make a good picture with digital (look at all the now infamous iPhone photographers/photo-journalists getting praise for their "work") but it takes a true artist to shoot with film and make magic happen... ;)

And yes, you're right, of course I've never processed film on a commercial scale, I'm not a lab! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
infowarfare said:
1. This was a non-story to begin with because Apple Online has always sold other competing headphones even after they acquired Beats, so adding one more to the line up is not much of a story...
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. It is a non-story. But this is MacRumors, and the website's livelihood depends on making big fat sensationalistic stories out of non-stories.
 
Keirasplace said:
Some people that reviewed them said that that wasn't the case (maybe compared to old ones); maybe you just had case of confirmation bias.
Click to expand...

They sound great for certain types of music, but horrible for others, especially live music. Still a major improvement over the solo hd's which sounded muffled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back