Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
To beats or not to beats, that is the question. Capitalism works when people have choices. I am happy that there are a lot of people that like Beats gear. But the reason a lot of people have Beats (and even Apple) gear has relatively little to do with performance. Apple is a fashion company and if you run in certain circles you have to have either Beats or Apple stuff, whether you realize it or not. And to most people the quality is acceptable.

People that stand alone and require performance (us elites ;)) understand that for low to medium quality music Apple and Beats are just fine. Like when working out, for background music on the bus, plane, etc. That does not mean that there is a right and wrong. Those that enjoy Apple and Beats listening devices, I say more power to you.

My ears cannot stand either for any extended listening. Over the ear, open back headphones are the best for extended critical listening. Even high quality closed back headphones result in fatigue over time as do in-ear devices.

I do listen to music with Bose sound cancelling headphones on a plane. But then again, that is not a critical listening environment and I can't do it for the complete flight. Until you have tried good quality headphones you cannot judge how bad Apple and Beats are.

Of course one would never connect good quality headphones to an Apple device because headphones cannot produce good sound if the audio quality is not present in the source.

Apple and Beats are good enough because most people don't have the experience with really good sound.
 
Maybe these can't fall out of ya ear, but they are ugly. I don't want to look like I'm in the 20th century version of star trek. Also, the price does not help so Galaxy Buds it is......
 
The AirPods when they first came out were not a hard sell as they were the only game in town and a new, novelty idea by apple with a truly wireless listening option. However, now, after people have been using the gen 1 and seen firsthand the negatives with them after use, see what the competitors have brought to the market, and seeing now little has been changed in the gen 2 while retaining a higher price point then the original gen 1 (yes u get the wireless charging case but have to pay more; if u didn’t want to pay more and didn’t want the wireless charging case there is virtually no reason to upgrade EXCEPT for your gen 1 battery life now being terrible and forcing the upgrade), the new AirPods and the BPro Buds will both be a hard sell for Apple at those price points.

Apparently $175 for a “1.5 year RENTAL” is a good deal to you.... I purchased the AirPods new for my wife and I both and we are lucky to get 2 hours of listening on a full charge now; that’s a ridiculous price point for a product that does not have any part replacement options for battery issues if they are gonna be that bad after such a short time. The AirPods are not “extremely competitively priced;” they are the most convenient, being completely wirefree, and offer unique integration within the Apple ecosystem due to iOS that u cannot get with the other brands. That’s why u pay for the AirPods, not because they have the best sound, battery life, features, or even fitment. The integrated user experience is what u pay for and expect from Apple. What I did not expect at that price from Apple was a device with a non replaceable battery that lost over HALF of its usage rate in a dramatically short time period as NONE of my other, less expensive, buds have done anything similar since their usage began.

I was being facetious when I stated “what do I know” as I know more then I probably should about headphones lol but I guess I forgot to add the /s.

I have many different sets of headphones from AirPod type (wireless buds) to wired (together) wireless buds to wired buds to cans to on-ear, over ear, and everything in the middle; as well as no name brands to Senn, B&O, Master & Dynamic, Sony, BOSE, Apple, Beats, Jabra, all the way to Grado. People will pay for convenience, features, reliability, and acceptable use for their products and devices. I have $85 cans that sound great, buds that haven’t lost ANY wireless battery at all, wireless cans that get 25-40 hours before charging, etc. Apple is simply not being competitive with products in pricing or feature set in this market segment any longer and this is evident by the volume of people keeping their old AirPods (gen 1) till they die and NOT upgrading, and choosing other products in this price range that are more in line with feature, prices, and consumer products expectations.

Didn’t mean to write a novel here lol, but if you think $250 for the BPro Buds is a good deal and u like them that’s great; and if u think the AirPods are competitively priced and like them then get a set and enjoy them too. If not, that’s great too. Variety gives us freedom to choose what we individually perceive is an acceptable trade off in price versus performance.

Have a great day
Airpods were not the only game in town. Bragi was probably the most well known brand back then and there were several other kickstarter campaigns that launched full products as well. What Apple did was popularize the product market and motivate competitors to enter. Airpods are not revolutionary in any form.

I never stated my personal opinion, so I'm not sure why you're responding as if I did. Personally I think Airpods have terrible sound quality, the fit is horrendous in ear, and switching between devices is a complete hassle. I'm in the Jabra Active Elite camp. I can stop playing music on my iPad and press play on my iPhone and it just switches over. No going into bluetooth menus, no fiddling with controls. Just stop music on one device and start it on another, extremely simple.

The argument I was responding to was that Apple's Airpods are a tough sell and given the demand, they most clearly ARE NOT. But evidently that wasn't clear, even with the quoted portion of your comment.
 
Yikes..... $250 is steep.

9 hours of listening isn’t specified if that’s with case recharge or 9 hours of listening “per charge” for each ear piece. AirPods 2.0 get about 4-5 hours and my AirPods 1.0 get (now) about 1.5-3.0 hours of listening per charge.

So, if Apple are advertising 9 full hours of use “per charge,” and they have improved sound performance over the AirPods, it might be worth a look relative to the $250 tag, but there are a lot of options other once u get over $250.

AirPods at $175 (est.) is a tough sell; these at $250 might be impossible. But what do I know about sales and purchasing lol.

It’s 24+ with the case, 9 hours of listening per charge. -_-
 
  • Like
Reactions: sp3k0psv3t
To beats or not to beats, that is the question. Capitalism works when people have choices. I am happy that there are a lot of people that like Beats gear. But the reason a lot of people have Beats (and even Apple) gear has relatively little to do with performance. Apple is a fashion company and if you run in certain circles you have to have either Beats or Apple stuff, whether you realize it or not. And to most people the quality is acceptable.

People that stand alone and require performance (us elites ;)) understand that for low to medium quality music Apple and Beats are just fine. Like when working out, for background music on the bus, plane, etc. That does not mean that there is a right and wrong. Those that enjoy Apple and Beats listening devices, I say more power to you.

My ears cannot stand either for any extended listening. Over the ear, open back headphones are the best for extended critical listening. Even high quality closed back headphones result in fatigue over time as do in-ear devices.

I do listen to music with Bose sound cancelling headphones on a plane. But then again, that is not a critical listening environment and I can't do it for the complete flight. Until you have tried good quality headphones you cannot judge how bad Apple and Beats are.

Of course one would never connect good quality headphones to an Apple device because headphones cannot produce good sound if the audio quality is not present in the source.

Apple and Beats are good enough because most people don't have the experience with really good sound.

Ya, nobody even considering these headphones is in the market for something like a pair of Audeze. Not the intended market. These are a workout headphone. The question is if at this price point you buy these, the Bose, Sennheiser momentums, or Jaybird offerings. The Beats headphones have the worst sound quality to my ears so it's an easy decision when the price points are all similar.
 
I do find it hilarious that Apple is marking Beats as their "premium" audio subsidiary.

Why? The Apple Beats is nothing like the original Beats, I mean that in a good way. Give a listen to the latest generation of on and over ear headphones and they are far better than the bass mess they used to be. Besides, what other headphone company does Apple own that they could make premium? Ha
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTBing
To beats or not to beats, that is the question. Capitalism works when people have choices. I am happy that there are a lot of people that like Beats gear. But the reason a lot of people have Beats (and even Apple) gear has relatively little to do with performance. Apple is a fashion company and if you run in certain circles you have to have either Beats or Apple stuff, whether you realize it or not. And to most people the quality is acceptable.

People that stand alone and require performance (us elites ;)) understand that for low to medium quality music Apple and Beats are just fine. Like when working out, for background music on the bus, plane, etc. That does not mean that there is a right and wrong. Those that enjoy Apple and Beats listening devices, I say more power to you.

My ears cannot stand either for any extended listening. Over the ear, open back headphones are the best for extended critical listening. Even high quality closed back headphones result in fatigue over time as do in-ear devices.

I do listen to music with Bose sound cancelling headphones on a plane. But then again, that is not a critical listening environment and I can't do it for the complete flight. Until you have tried good quality headphones you cannot judge how bad Apple and Beats are.

Of course one would never connect good quality headphones to an Apple device because headphones cannot produce good sound if the audio quality is not present in the source.

Apple and Beats are good enough because most people don't have the experience with really good sound.

All hail our superior sound overlords!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: nt5672
Apple and Beats are good enough because most people don't have the experience with really good sound.

I have plenty of experience with good sound and I definitely think Apple and Beats are good enough. I agree not necessarily good enough for critical listening, which is what my dynamic and planar headphones are for, or for that matter, no headphones as I prefer a really great sounding well set up audio system with loudspeakers. But if you are commuting, traveling, working out or drowning out your office mates, Beats and competitors are perfectly fine. Horses for courses, so to speak, and having options is a great thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nt5672 and JTBing
Powerbeats Pro have a lot to live up to, and I think they’ll be among the best true wireless IEM’s if not the best. While Beats let me down once (Beats Studio3 wasn’t great), it looks like they really tried with the Powerbeats Pro to get the fit and sound right. This is a segment of the market they could absolutely dominate like the AirPods since they share the new H1 chip, so they have a lot riding on the Powerbeats Pro.

Even more impressively, it looks like they followed a form follows design language. They’re not the best-looking Beats, but they are the most functional and I’d bet they’ll be the most refined.

https://www.theverge.com/platform/a...s-pro-true-wireless-earbuds-announced-airpods
 
Maybe these can't fall out of ya ear, but they are ugly. I don't want to look like I'm in the 20th century version of star trek. Also, the price does not help so Galaxy Buds it is......
they actually look pretty nice when you’re wearing them. You can’t see the ear hook really, and it looks better than AirPods with their dangling stalks.
 
Apple is a fashion company and if you run in certain circles you have to have either Beats or Apple stuff, whether you realize it or not. And to most people the quality is acceptable.

Holy smokes! Now that's a real knee-slapper. Funniest thing I've heard all day. A fashion company selling products to people running in certain circles.

Yes, and that's why AirPods are so popular. All of their owners strutting around town (in certain circles, of course), letting everyone know how exquisite their taste in fashion is.

Where did I go wrong? I like my AirPods because they're great for phone calls.

Now I'm getting a major case of the shakes and feeling compelled to seeing how I can accessorize my AirPods with my certain circle wardrobe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTBing
Why? The Apple Beats is nothing like the original Beats, I mean that in a good way. Give a listen to the latest generation of on and over ear headphones and they are far better than the bass mess they used to be. Besides, what other headphone company does Apple own that they could make premium? Ha

The Apple Beats are very mediocre for the price point. Case in point, I purchased and listened to the Apple Beats Solo 3 before I gave them away to my girlfriend. I'm not the target audience for this because I have different standards for headphones. Apple could've branded a new audio division that is unrelated to Beats for their premium sector. The Beats brand to me whether under Apple or standalone is still a hipster lifestyle fashion brand.
 
The Apple Beats are very mediocre for the price point. Case in point, I purchased and listened to the Apple Beats Solo 3 before I gave them away to my girlfriend. I'm not the target audience for this because I have different standards for headphones. Apple could've branded a new audio division that is unrelated to Beats for their premium sector. The Beats brand to me whether under Apple or standalone is still a hipster lifestyle fashion brand.

Can’t please everyone.
 
Beats is a brand that is not ecosystem dependent. Using a proprietary charging method tied to a single ecosystem makes little sense. USB-C makes more sense as far as the broader market that buys Beats. Lightning only makes sense on Beats if the intent is to focus sales on iOS users.

Makes sense. I should have said “personally” in my post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 69Mustang
So you've already tried a pair and know how they sound? Please do tell....

I bought the senns a couple of months ago too. They really do sound great. Better than all the others I tried apart from possibly the BOse sports the ones that make you look like shrek. BUT I may sell them if these have an overall better fit and similar sound quality. I think the fit may be better because of the hooks ( as the senns slip out of my ear when I sweat in the gym) but the quality I doubt will be as good. So will be an interesting comparison.
[doublepost=1554321592][/doublepost]
Oh cool how did you get to hear them already to know this ?

Their beats audio, all their models sound the same, which is low quality and too much bass.
 
Their beats audio, all their models sound the same, which is low quality and too much bass.

Lies. So not only have you not tried the new Powerbeats Wireless, you haven’t tried any Beats headphones recently. Therefore your opinion means jack squat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTBing
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.