It’s not 2010, Beats actually sound good also. Enjoy the trash cans on your ear
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
NOT buying Beats studio wireless W1.
- Thread starter Jervasio
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s not 2010, Beats actually sound good also. Enjoy the trash cans on your ear
Received my Studio3 this past week and have tested them in a busy NYC cafe, sidewalk on a busy street, 3 hour flight, and at home and am in love. The noise canceling is solid and the sound signature is so lively while maintaining a relatively neutral signature. Bose is more boring. And the gray and gold color ware is amazing.
I also find them equally comfortable to my QC35s but with the amazing benefit of W1.
I also find them equally comfortable to my QC35s but with the amazing benefit of W1.
They're still severely overpriced. You can get the Sennheiser 4.50 BTNC for $100 less than the Beats Solo3 which includes actual active noise cancelling. The Studio 3 is a critical update, but the improvement is still not worth the excessive Beats markup. QC 35 and 25 are better.
I like Beats. They're getting better, but I can't pretend they're as good of a product as what else is on the market.
This is the problem with Apple renaming industry standard technologies or iterations of these technologies their silly marketing names... W1, W2, Fusion Drive, AirPower, A11 Bionic processor, etc... it just makes the buyer confused....
.... But then again Samsung did release the Galaxy Tab 8 then a year later release the Galaxy Tab 5... so there's not necessarily always logic to why these bloated companies do what they do.
.... But then again Samsung did release the Galaxy Tab 8 then a year later release the Galaxy Tab 5... so there's not necessarily always logic to why these bloated companies do what they do.
In all reality, I just happen to own the Beats Studio 3 Wireless, between the build, noise cancellation and, sound quality and, so many more features, including the option as to where, you can go from noise cancellation, to the stock audio preference, me personally, I use the noise cancellation also, I love the amount of bass within the headphones also, the fact that they’re not on ear but, they’re over ear, in other words they cover your ears, for a better listening experience, the W1 chip is all so amazing, there’s features within the chip, including the ability to hold the pairing button, above the right ear cup, for a certain amount of time(not exactly sure how long, haven’t counted)but, your headphones pop up on your iPhone in a 3D model and, you can see the exact color and, model the headphones are worth every penny in my eyes.
Apple pilots new chips in specific products before ramping up mass production. The W chips are on that roadmap as well.
While technically the W2 chip is the successor of the W1, just like all Apples SoC Series (ex. A7 > A6 > A5) its very unlikely there would be any tangible benefit incorporating it into headphones at this time.
The W2 chip used in the Apple Watch is reportedly 50% more efficiency with WiFi and Bluetooth. However that is compared to the previous Apple Watches that used off the shelf wireless controllers. And they don't say how much of that is from Wifi....99% of the 50% improvement?
Plus the W2 chip is the Apple Watch is modified specifically for that application. Apple does this with devices, like disabling a core in the AppleTV 3. Appleinsight.com via their imaging report...
"The floor plan of the W2 chip has changed significantly from its predecessor, the W1: the RF transceiver is more complex, and the memory blocks have been removed in the W2."
Which is likely done for energy efficiency and something a device like headphones (without the S2 in the watch to piggy back off) can't afford.
Plus lets be realistic, how much can Apple improve bluetooth efficiency in just over a years time?
I doubt their will be significant gains or benefits using the W2 in the Studio3's that the W1's doesn't already provide.
My Studio3's that replaced my stolen QC35's get better battery life and SIGNIFICANTLY longer range. Can't really stress the range enough, they will cover my entire home from my iMac. The Sony gets around 30% better battery life in specific modes (NC on) however have a battery that is 210% bigger.
As far as sound quality goes, all three are "close enough" to make it a matter of opinion, at least for me. While they each likely have quality of sound that are objectively better at specific points and frequencies they are all bluetooth noise cancelling headphones and they all sound like bluetooth noise cancelling headphones. That is like comparing the sound quality of the included headphones from Apple vs the included headphones from Samsung. One might sound better but not enough to ignore all other functionality for. For me when comparing headphones that are a close comparison to me it becomes very subjective exactly like a TV/Phone screen that is technically oversaturated may appeal more to a particular person vs a dull perfect calibration.
If you have an all Apple ecosystem like I do the Studio3's are clear winner in my opinion mostly just for the effortless syncing and switching between devices thanks to the W1 chip and iCloud account sync. I'm actually using my headphones much more often because of it. However if your focus is narrowed down to a specific function or feature (audio fidelity for example) an all-in-one type of headphone like these (Studio3, 1000X-M2, QC35's) may not be your best bet at all.
If someone is willing to compromise feature set for sound quality its not difficult to find headphones that have noticeably better audio quality. I have a friend that found a NEW set of PM-1's for around 650, apples to oranges I agree but the comparison of sound quality of the Studio3's vs QC35's are put in perspective.