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

Apple Announces AirPods Max Over-Ear Headphones With Noise Cancellation, Priced at $549

jprmercado said:
That price made me go 😳😳😳
Click to expand...

Made me go
1607468599474.png
1607468601869.png
1607468606079.png
lol


Bluetoot- said:
Merry Christmas!
Click to expand...

Merry ... NO AIRTAGS Suckas ! LMAO!

Had to say it since so many here have dogged me out about its real it's coming it's a steal, I say ... let me feel the fabric of your fibre ;)
 
GarethR said:
Haha, I’d say the opposite - I prefer the H95 to the H9i and H9 3rd generation I had too. The sound to me feels fuller and slightly more forward than the H9 series did.
Click to expand...
And this is why reviews and preferences to headphones and earphones is so subjective. Peoples ears are not the same.
 
clerkpalmer said:
Easy. Just trying to have an informed discussion. I didn't say you are ignorant. I find it very hard to believe that you cannot perceive a difference. If there wasn't a difference Apple wouldn't have implemented it in the ipad pro. Certainly reasonable minds can disagree over whether it's a difference that matters to them, but 120 is objectively superior to 60.
Click to expand...

The issue is whether it’s so obviously better that, as you propose, Apple is ripping off dumb consumers by not including it yet. It is not.

And it is not *objectively* better. It is *subjectively* better. If you cannot see any difference (as I cannot, and as reported here on many other threads, I am not alone), then all 120Hz does is run down the battery faster, in which case it is subjectively worse.
 
anson42 said:
The thing is, I'm an iPhone/iOS user and an Apple ecosystem customer. Whether the iPhone has a 120Hz refresh or not is definitely not enough to make me switch to a different phone and different ecosystem and then switch back. Seriously, what is the point of that? iPhones will get that feature when they get it. Honestly, what other phones have is only of mere interest, essentially nothing at this time would make me move to a non-iOS phone. I can tell you that I'm not alone, and it has nothing to with being a fanboy or not, it's all about practicality and about iPhones being a great tool as they are.
Click to expand...
The point is that Apple charges a premium price for tech that is not always class leading. As a headphone enthusiast, I won't buy a 550 Bluetooth headset that lacks LDAC. I also passed on the iphone 12 because I can't stand that in 2020 Apple hasn't implemented 120 hz. It's perfectly fine if those features don't matter to you but Apple continues to sell themselves as tech forward when they are quite often a step or two behind. I own plenty of apple products and enjoy using them. In this circumstance, I think Apple has gone too far with the pricing. Ordinarily this would be an instant buy for me. I guess we will have to see what the reviewers think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
I say great. The more they sell stuff like this the more money can go into the cool stuff, like new M series processor R&D etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: newyorksole
cmaier said:
The issue is whether it’s so obviously better that, as you propose, Apple is ripping off dumb consumers by not including it yet. It is not.

And it is not *objectively* better. It is *subjectively* better. If you cannot see any difference (as I cannot, and as reported here on many other threads, I am not alone), then all 120Hz does is run down the battery faster, in which case it is subjectively worse.
Click to expand...
Fair point about the battery but I'm sorry a 120 screen is objectively better than 60. This is not subject to reasonable debate And plenty of other phone manufacturers have solved the battery problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Kierkegaarden said:
As others have stated, the price isn’t out of line compared to other products in this particular market segment. There are more expensive cans out there, and some require a preamp. Maybe the Max cans can deliver a high quality sound wirelessly and without the need for a preamp? That would definitely make this product stand out, and quite impressively.
Click to expand...
yet the KEY here is ...

For Apple's Music and iTunes purchased music codec ... default settings even with AAC 320Kbps bit-rate ... is the audio quality from the source actually reflected in 'better quality' on the AirPods Max vs AirPods Pro or is it simply music Volume that is better?

Therein lies the rub.

Louder music usually 'sounds' as 'better' music for the average person, and marketing helps sell that (ahem 'people aren't hearing the music') yet it doesn't mean better quality of the music. HERE reviews will be critical for those hoping to spend $600 US on a 'chance' it lives up to Apple's former AirPods success. For me, right now ... not wanting to take that chance EVEN if I can afford it.

Maybe if I didn't have an iPhone SE 2016 vs iPhone 12 mini/pro my decision would change, yet doubtful. These need to sound out of this world at that dollar amount AND sound THAT good whether listing to Apple music from a Mac, iPad Pro, Apple Watch S4-S6 or iPhone.

From my initial take ... these are a $200 premium for a better looking, more physical design options of a Beats Pro 3!
 
clerkpalmer said:
The point is that Apple charges a premium price for tech that is not always class leading. As a headphone enthusiast, I won't buy a 550 Bluetooth headset that lacks LDAC. I also passed on the iphone 12 because I can't stand that in 2020 Apple hasn't implemented 120 hz. It's perfectly fine if those features don't matter to you but Apple continues to sell themselves as tech forward when they are quite often a step or two behind. I own plenty of apple products and enjoy using them. In this circumstance, I think Apple has gone too far with the pricing. Ordinarily this would be an instant buy for me. I guess we will have to see what the reviewers think.
Click to expand...
My what's the point comment was more about switching phone brands to get a new feature but I know what you're saying.

I do believe that Apple is tech forward but not all tech is necessary in Apple products. Some will make their way in, like 120Hz screens, and some, like LDAC probably never will. That's not about being tech forward but about curating for their ecosystem. If Apple never sold a pair of AirPod Max's outside of iOS and macOS users they'd probably be just fine with it. And realistically, those who aren't Apple users today shouldn't buy these headphones because of the subpar audio they're going to get from non-AAC sources.

Where I think Apple is tech forward is with architecture like the M1 and even with the inclusion of (the marketing speak) audio computation in these headphones. Sure, audio manipulation has been in headphone products before, but do they get the technical focus that Apple puts into theirs? You can certainly argue that it's over engineering to try to justify a price point but I see it as audio possibilities that Apple can build on over time, and who knows, maybe they can make lossy music sound better, guess we'll see.

I'm still not buying these headphones though. I have enough pairs of headphones and these are not portable enough for me. In ears are the best for portability for me. (And yes I know not everyone likes in-ears which is why on- and over- ear "portable" headphones exist.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: clerkpalmer
Salut to ...

Evans Hankey, VP of Industrial Design! She takes over where Jony Ive left off ... design is SOLID Evans!
(personally I think the digital crown use was a bit of a cop-out but will have to use it to see its worth of use here). Also who on earth designed a Bra for these? like really?!

Gary Geaves VP, Acoustics
- these REALLY need to play the part! what magic was done with existing audio fidelity of Apple Music and iTunes stream/download quality here in these?
PS: He's part of the OG HomePod experience as well so I have high hopes here.

Patents by Gary Geaves:

Gary P. Geaves Inventions, Patents and Patent Applications - Justia Patents Search

USPTO patent applications submitted by and patents granted to Gary P. Geaves
patents.justia.com patents.justia.com
 
clerkpalmer said:
Fair point about the battery but I'm sorry a 120 screen is objectively better than 60. This is not subject to reasonable debate And plenty of other phone manufacturers have solved the battery problem.
Click to expand...
With Apple, a lot of features which Apple products are lacking are not objectively better until Apple implements them. This happens time after time after time. OLED also was not better until Apple finally managed to get enough supply of it from Samsung.
 
As I stated in another thread. It’s a good thing nobody is buying these. Because the shipping times on all colors just slipped months into 2021.
 
anson42 said:
My what's the point comment was more about switching phone brands to get a new feature but I know what you're saying.

I do believe that Apple is tech forward but not all tech is necessary in Apple products. Some will make their way in, like 120Hz screens, and some, like LDAC probably never will. That's not about being tech forward but about curating for their ecosystem. If Apple never sold a pair of AirPod Max's outside of iOS and macOS users they'd probably be just fine with it. And realistically, those who aren't Apple users today shouldn't buy these headphones because of the subpar audio they're going to get from non-AAC sources.

Where I think Apple is tech forward is with architecture like the M1 and even with the inclusion of (the marketing speak) audio computation in these headphones. Sure, audio manipulation has been in headphone products before, but do they get the technical focus that Apple puts into theirs? You can certainly argue that it's over engineering to try to justify a price point but I see it as audio possibilities that Apple can build on over time, and who knows, maybe they can make lossy music sound better, guess we'll see.

I'm still not buying these headphones though. I have enough pairs of headphones and these are not portable enough for me. In ears are the best for portability for me. (And yes I know not everyone likes in-ears which is why on- and over- ear "portable" headphones exist.)
Click to expand...
Remember, Apple did not implement equalizer for HomePod. So much for computational sound.
 
cmaier said:
This, right here, is what’s wrong with the internet. Don’t tell me what I’ve used. I own and use an iPad Pro every day with 120hz. I see no noticeable difference between that and my iphone 11. “Someone has a different opinion than me so he must be ignorant.”
Click to expand...

clerkpalmer said:
Easy. Just trying to have an informed discussion. I didn't say you are ignorant. I find it very hard to believe that you cannot perceive a difference. If there wasn't a difference Apple wouldn't have implemented it in the ipad pro. Certainly reasonable minds can disagree over whether it's a difference that matters to them, but 120 is objectively superior to 60.
Click to expand...
There is no question that 120 is objectively a bigger number than 60.
 
clerkpalmer said:
I'm pretty sure the fancy colors and ridiculous carry case/purse tells us who they are aimed at and it's not audiophiles. And if that didn't tell you the lack of LDAC should... These are aimed squarely at the consumer market.
Click to expand...
Fancy colors? Good grief.
 
dszakal said:
I'm okay with the price tag.

But if and only if it's lossless on Wireless (at least 44khz 16 bit without any lossy compression, as I'll use it with Tidal)

But if for this price tag I get a 256kbps AAC recompression as with the standard airpods, then no, thanks, I wouldn't even buy for $100.
Click to expand...
This would be such a game changer. This needs to become a thing, and actually the standard. I think it’s not even technologically difficult at this point - why aren’t they doing it yet?
 
Damn MacRumors... I glanced at this article and saw “December 15” thinking that’s when they’d go on sale.

Turns out they went on sale this morning and now I can’t get them until Marchhh ugh.
 
dszakal said:
I'm okay with the price tag.

But if and only if it's lossless on Wireless (at least 44khz 16 bit without any lossy compression, as I'll use it with Tidal)

But if for this price tag I get a 256kbps AAC recompression as with the standard airpods, then no, thanks, I wouldn't even buy for $100.
Click to expand...

For reals! Lossless would've been nice... but with it being like almost $300 more than my Beats, no thanks! WOW!
 
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