Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Fair enough . I may have it wrong.

So what is your point ? How is a cinema amp relevant ?

If what the previous poster was saying was true then DJs wouldn't touch the sound they would just press play.

And home cinemas Amps would be just as good at cinema as classic and wouldn't have adjustments on them. As they would just output the incoming signal.

So there isn't a BEST, things may still need adjusting.

----------

Since when has a DJ been interested in Proper Audio Quality! :D

Good point, especially the ones in the pubs around where I live. Bloody hell, they have a large pair of speakers with a laptop and don't care what anything sounds like as long as it's loud. But after a few they all sound the same.
 
If what the previous poster was saying was true then DJs wouldn't touch the sound they would just press play.

And home cinemas Amps would be just as good at cinema as classic and wouldn't have adjustments on them. As they would just output the incoming signal.

So there isn't a BEST, things may still need adjusting.

It's the DJs job to mix music, they are creative .

Home cinema amps are not creative , they are designed to provide the best playback of a standard set by the industry. Quality home cinema amps do not have adjustments , they have modes. As an expansive home cinema setup is multi purpose , movies , music, gaming, etc

There are times were you can be creative and there are times where you pay for the reproduction of a standard.

I agree i misunderstood what you said
 
Quality home cinema amps do not have adjustments , they have modes. As an expansive home cinema setup is multi purpose , movies , music, gaming, etc

Yes they do have different modes, but the poster said sound shouldn't need modifying, they should just replicate the incoming signal. Which as you pointed out they don't do, they have modes to slightly alter the sound.

SgtPepper12 had a very good explanation on the previous page.
 
2.5mm stereo plug. . . Oh god why.

The detachable cable is 2.5 on the headphone side, 3.5 on the other, they come with straight and coiled 2.5-to-3.5 cables that are easily sourced from just about anywhere.

If you’re not aware, the M50Xs are _spectacular_ headphones, especially for the $169 street price (the previous model [M50] without the detachable is also fantastic at about $109).

Highly regarded in the audio world :cool:
 
The detachable cable is 2.5 on the headphone side, 3.5 on the other, they come with straight and coiled 2.5-to-3.5 cables that are easily sourced from just about anywhere.

If you’re not aware, the M50Xs are _spectacular_ headphones, especially for the $169 street price (the previous model [M50] without the detachable is also fantastic at about $109).

Highly regarded in the audio world :cool:

I've seen these recommended on numerous occasions so they are obviously very good. But not very stylish. And if you are planning on wearing them out and about you do need a bit of both.
 
Yes they do have different modes, but the poster said sound shouldn't need modifying, they should just replicate the incoming signal. Which as you pointed out they don't do, they have modes to slightly alter the sound.

Actually no. Your suppose to use the right mode for the source.

Your not suppose to watch a movie In music mode for example.

A good amplifier is suppose to replicate the source exactly as it's created. Hence a good home cinema amp should replicate how the movie was played in a cinema. That is what you pay for.

If you watch the movie in other modes, your missing out on how it's intended to be viewed, sure you can, but why??
 
Actually no. Your suppose to use the right mode for the source.

Your not suppose to watch a movie In music mode for example.

A good amplifier is suppose to replicate the source exactly as it's created. Hence a good home cinema amp should replicate how the movie was played in a cinema. That is what you pay for.

If you watch the movie in other modes, your missing out on how it's intended to be viewed, sure you can, but why??
I think we are on about two different things. You are kind of arguing my point.

If it is just replicating the source exactly why would it need to know how you want it to sound? Well because it doesn't just replicate the sound. It adjusts it slightly.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Image
Audio-Technica ATH-M50x (AMAZON)
Best bang for your buck on headphones.

And hideous as heck. So funny how all of us have no problem paying top dollar for Apple products when there are so many quality and less expensive alternatives. Why...because we all love the Apple logo and how it makes us feel.

Beats has some of that mojo, and even if bass isn't welcomed in your favorite genre of music, it is in the audience Beats it's marketed to. No one is forcing you to buy Beats headphones now that Apple is the parent company.
 
Understandable based on your previous post.

If by this you are trying to not so subtly insinuate that I'm unable to derive to the conclusion your post was making, then you my friend are even more out of depth than I thought, because the fact is you make no sense; In essence.

Now go thou, for such things as you, I can scarce think there's any, ye're so slight.
 
And hideous as heck. So funny how all of us have no problem paying top dollar for Apple products when there are so many quality and less expensive alternatives. Why...because we all love the Apple logo and how it makes us feel.

Beats has some of that mojo, and even if bass isn't welcomed in your favorite genre of music, it is in the audience Beats it's marketed to. No one is forcing you to buy Beats headphones now that Apple is the parent company.

Yeah this is kind of my take on it.

What I didn't like Beats doing tho was giving their name to audio on a HP laptop. They sound just like laptop speakers. Kind of devalued the name IMO.
 
That's the strange thing, Apple has the cultural clout already, and it's backed up by very solid products across the board.

Beats may have some of this clout, but there's nothing of any quality backing it up, it's just hype. This acquisition just seems so un-Apple to me.

Sure, Beats has clout. Not that kind of clout I'd think apple would be interested in though?

Also agree. Seems sooooo weird.
 
So ... different owners, same massively overpriced, crappy products?

Still scratching my head over why Apple would bother with acquiring Beats in the first place.

Their headphones cater towards bass heads - i.e. most kids, teenagers and a few adults everywhere. They are considered trendy and priced at a premium so fit Apple's biz model and they sell well. ;)
 
is it just me thinking beats is soooo not apple :eek:

Selling a product that looks beautiful but is inferior when compared to other similar products and is premium priced? I am pretty sure that's EXACTLY Apple. ;)
 
Pompous and pretentious words describing the magnificence of really crappy products on Apple site. Doesn't put a little doubt regarding other items sold in there? Can't wait to hear Tim Cook telling us how "incredible" these earphones are

That is exactly what I just thought when I read the pitch for them on the site.
 
I've seen these recommended on numerous occasions so they are obviously very good. But not very stylish. And if you are planning on wearing them out and about you do need a bit of both.

I would argue they are just as stylish as any other over the ear headphone. The fit and finish are very premium.
 
Beats products are not marketed to audio purists

I was a recording studio engineer for several years, and we used multiple monitors to simulate various environments. The "truest" monitors we had were often not the most "pleasing" to the average person, because most people are not true audiophiles.

Typically Beats products are for people who want a trendy name and a lot of bass.

Don't like it?

Don't buy it.

But why complain about those who do?
 
And hideous as heck. So funny how all of us have no problem paying top dollar for Apple products when there are so many quality and less expensive alternatives. Why...because we all love the Apple logo and how it makes us feel.

Beats has some of that mojo, and even if bass isn't welcomed in your favorite genre of music, it is in the audience Beats it's marketed to. No one is forcing you to buy Beats headphones now that Apple is the parent company.

Don't talk as if everyone here is like you! I for one do not buy Apple products because of the logo on the back, nor do I "get" these people who do it!

Since you are one of them can you please I beg of you tell me how exactly does this logo make you feel, and if you can't appreciate, find desirable or in any other way think of anything better about Apple's products compared to the alternatives, why would you spend the extra money for the logo only? Please.
 
Last edited:
Now to improve the quality

Apple has the brand (Beats by Dr. Dre) ... now I fully expect them to start working on the quality...

The Solo2s are already an improvement, and I think under Apple's umbrella we'll see significant improvements in price/performance, aka value.
 
I tried the Beats Solo2 headphones, it is not bad...

but with the $200 price tag, Sennheiser Momentum headphone (when it is on sale), Sennheiser HD25s/Amperior headphone (when it is on sale), Grado SR80e, V-Moda XS, and Audio-Technica ATH-M50x can produce better music, with wider range...
 
Well, this could be a good thing. Does this mean that if I do a search for headphones on their website I will be able to just see good brands, and have the Beats sequestered off in their own little corner so they don't clutter my results view?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.