Why Not To Buy The Beats By Dre

[SomeGuyDude]

I'm perpetually amused by people who readily jumped to conclusions based on what they feel fits their arguement. Do you have any idea what I mean by I'm not much of a headphone guy? I mean I'd prefer to use actual speakers to listen to my music vs. a pair of headphones on my ears. I was a partner in a recording studio for a couple years and recorded multiple artists and groups. I've been in bands as well as ran live sound for many different bands and one of my pet peeves is when you have certain instruments overpowering others and putting things out of balance. 80's music is generally terrible for this, they might as well as just not plugged most of the bass players in in that era and just had them standing there to round out the band.

Just because I'm not much of a headphone guy doesn't mean that I don't know about sound quality and makes you look foolish by assuming just that.

Mmhm.

Let's revisit this part of your post:

I own Yamaha earbuds .... I need portability over quality.

I'll be ignoring the gaming headsets because while there are no gaming headsets that sound good, they're a necessary evil for online gaming (I use a logitech set for playing Borderlands 2).

Now then. See, if you actually gave a toss about sound you'd be aware of these neat things called IEMs, and if you actually did any significant work in recording and live sound you'd be WELL aware of the quality that exists out there from companies like Ultimate Ears, Sennheiser, and Shure, to say nothing of the scads of lesser known companies that most people understandably are not familiar with.

Someone who cares about sound in the way you profess to, and someone who dabbles in the insanely expensive hobby of home theater, would likely be someone willing to drop a little coin on a decent set of IEMs since even mid/high end IEMs are a drop in the bucket price-wise compared to budget home speakers. To say nothing of all the downright awesome portable on-ear headphones out there.

I have a good friend who's also big into sound, has a $7K speaker setup, who readily admits that this isn't even approaching the level of insanity others get into, a number that would get you the most expensive consumer headphones in the world with some money left over for an amp. He's not a headphone guy either, but for portability he had no problem doing some cursory research and picking up a pair of $300 portables. The VModa M100 in his case.

You? Yamaha. Freaking. Earbuds. Because there's no such thing as "portable" and "quality" together according to you.

 

[VI™]

Mmhm.

Let's revisit this part of your post:



I'll be ignoring the gaming headsets because while there are no gaming headsets that sound good, they're a necessary evil for online gaming (I use a logitech set for playing Borderlands 2).

Now then. See, if you actually gave a toss about sound you'd be aware of these neat things called IEMs, and if you actually did any significant work in recording and live sound you'd be WELL aware of the quality that exists out there from companies like Ultimate Ears, Sennheiser, and Shure, to say nothing of the scads of lesser known companies that most people understandably are not familiar with.

Someone who cares about sound in the way you profess to, and someone who dabbles in the insanely expensive hobby of home theater, would likely be someone willing to drop a little coin on a decent set of IEMs since even mid/high end IEMs are a drop in the bucket price-wise compared to budget home speakers. To say nothing of all the downright awesome portable on-ear headphones out there.

I have a good friend who's also big into sound, has a $7K speaker setup, who readily admits that this isn't even approaching the level of insanity others get into, a number that would get you the most expensive consumer headphones in the world with some money left over for an amp. He's not a headphone guy either, but for portability he had no problem doing some cursory research and picking up a pair of $300 portables. The VModa M100 in his case.

You? Yamaha. Freaking. Earbuds. Because there's no such thing as "portable" and "quality" together according to you.

There you go again, assuming and putting words in to someone's mouth. Where did I say you can't have both? I just said that my main concern was portability over quality. I don't listen to music through headphones. The earbuds are for the iPad when working out and if I need to hear something when I don't want to speakers turned up on my computer or iPad.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

There you go again, assuming and putting words in to someone's mouth. Where did I say you can't have both? I just said that my main concern was portability over quality. I don't listen to music through headphones. The earbuds are for the iPad when working out and if I need to hear something when I don't want to speakers turned up on my computer or iPad.

I assumed nothing. I simply quoted you and responded to it. You said, twice now, that you want "portability over quality" which, going by the rules of English, means that you were under the impression that getting the former required sacrificing the latter.

So I repeat.

"Portability over quality" is not a valid concept. Aside from being grammatically correct, it is not a legitimate statement. There are so many portable headphones that sound amazing that there is literally no scenario in which one must take "portability over quality".

You can say you prefer "cheap" over quality, but even then any music lover worth his salt would be well aware that you needn't sacrifice quality for budget either. Xiaomi Pistons are $30 earbuds that are incredibly well regarded.

The point of all this is that you took umbrage at my above comment, someone who does not know headphones making comments about the QUALITY of headphones, and then in your arguments against that only proved the point further.

That's all. If you'd like to explain how "portability over quality" works, I would LOVE to hear it.

 

[VI™]

I assumed nothing. I simply quoted you and responded to it. You said, twice now, that you want "portability over quality" which, going by the rules of English, means that you were under the impression that getting the former required sacrificing the latter.

So I repeat.

"Portability over quality" is not a valid concept. Aside from being grammatically correct, it is not a legitimate statement. There are so many portable headphones that sound amazing that there is literally no scenario in which one must take "portability over quality".

You can say you prefer "cheap" over quality, but even then any music lover worth his salt would be well aware that you needn't sacrifice quality for budget either. Xiaomi Pistons are $30 earbuds that are incredibly well regarded.

The point of all this is that you took umbrage at my above comment, someone who does not know headphones making comments about the QUALITY of headphones, and then in your arguments against that only proved the point further.

That's all. If you'd like to explain how "portability over quality" works, I would LOVE to hear it.

Earbud vs over the ear headphone vs desktop speakers vs a full size speaker

Macbook air vs 13" macbook pro vs 15" macbook pro vs mac mini vs mac pro

Speedlight vs battery operated monolight vs wall powered monolight

ipod nano vs ipod mini vs ipod classic vs music server

Need I go on?

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Earbud vs over the ear headphone vs desktop speakers vs a full size speaker

Macbook air vs 13" macbook pro vs 15" macbook pro vs mac mini vs mac pro

Speedlight vs battery operated monolight vs wall powered monolight

ipod nano vs ipod mini vs ipod classic vs music server

Need I go on?

Actually you do need to go on, because your examples (aside from all being Mac only) are also the best models that the company offers at each size. Which just means that flagship small products are not as good as flagship larger products from the same brand.

Excuse me, but, no duh.

You have the hilarious misconception that speakers (and other products actually) are inherently "better" as they get bigger. The JH Siren Roxanne, Shure SE846, Westone ES5, Sennheiser IE800, 1964 Ears, Heir Audio 8.a are all in-ear headphones that cost somewhere in the vicinity of $1000 and sound absolutely godlike. Far better than cheaper full-sized cans and a lot better than similarly priced floor and desktop speakers.

They are all also perfectly portable.

So, are you saying that a wal-mart desktop computer is better than a Macbook Air?

Is a Lamborghini worse than a Hummer H2 because it's smaller?

Actually it's funny you brought up the Nano. There's the Astell & Kern AK240 that's a top-end portable audio player with absolutely unparalleled audio quality. Which means you could pair up your JH Roxannes ($1300) with the AK240 ($2500) and have a nearly $4000 portable setup that delivers a level of audio quality that will absolutely trump any standalone setup in its price range, and necessitate spending QUITE a bit more in order to get better audio. It's all also small enough to stick in a jeans pocket.

However, you couched all this in defense of your bargain bin Yamaha earbuds because you needed "portability over quality", and your reference points for a portable audio player is the Nano, a cheap little toy.

Again, perhaps you meant "cheap over quality", which is fine as well, but you can spend about $300 and have a high quality DAP/earbud combo as well, and $300 for someone who dabbles in home theatre is just pocket change, is it not?

Need I go on?

 

[VI™]

Actually you do need to go on, because your examples (aside from all being Mac only) are also the best models that the company offers at each size. Which just means that flagship small products are not as good as flagship larger products from the same brand.

Excuse me, but, no duh.

You have the hilarious misconception that speakers (and other products actually) are inherently "better" as they get bigger. The JH Siren Roxanne, Shure SE846, Westone ES5, Sennheiser IE800, 1964 Ears, Heir Audio 8.a are all in-ear headphones that cost somewhere in the vicinity of $1000 and sound absolutely godlike. Far better than cheaper full-sized cans and a lot better than similarly priced floor and desktop speakers.

They are all also perfectly portable.

So, are you saying that a wal-mart desktop computer is better than a Macbook Air?

Can be, if you get one specced right. Most desktop chips have a faster cache unless you get an older version, better GPUs (even the older ones), better cooling, the ability to connect more peripherals.

Is a Lamborghini worse than a Hummer H2 because it's smaller?

Depends what you're using it for and you're also paying ten times the amount for it.

Actually it's funny you brought up the Nano. There's the Astell & Kern AK240 that's a top-end portable audio player with absolutely unparalleled audio quality. Which means you could pair up your JH Roxannes ($1300) with the AK240 ($2500) and have a nearly $4000 portable setup that delivers a level of audio quality that will absolutely trump any standalone setup in its price range, and necessitate spending QUITE a bit more in order to get better audio. It's all also small enough to stick in a jeans pocket.

even better than vinyl on a good record player? Because I'd like to see you stick one of those in your pocket.

However, you couched all this in defense of your bargain bin Yamaha earbuds because you needed "portability over quality", and your reference points for a portable audio player is the Nano, a cheap little toy.

Again, perhaps you meant "cheap over quality", which is fine as well, but you can spend about $300 and have a high quality DAP/earbud combo as well, and $300 for someone who dabbles in home theatre is just pocket change, is it not?

Need I go on?

And even then it generally won't sound as good as something larger. You can't get the bas response and over all range. Hand me a pair of earbuds that will be able to reproduce the tone of a bass that's dropped tuned to hell and back and that can replicate the growl and feel out of a nice tube amp.

You can keep ranting as much as you like, but back to my original post on the Beats, so they're high quality headphones that outperform everything in their price range? How about you rant on about that?

 

[Irishman]

VI,

You really need to bow out while you can. You're getting in waaay over your head here.

And about Beats? I do agree with your comment in post #150 that Beats are overpriced for what you get. They play bloated bass, little else, break easily (especially the wiring and headband components). They sell well because of rap cache, and that's it! Even Bose makes better headphones for the money. If someone is a basshead and wants to spend $300 on cans that will destroy the Beats lines, I recommend the V Moda Crossfade M100s all day long. Hell, you can get 'em at Best Buy now! Now that Apple's acquired them, I can only hope that they improve their sound quality to get them more in line with established standards for sound quality.

Your comment in post #161 about how "vinyl on a good record player" can sound better than lossless digital files played back through JH Roxanne headphones & the Astell & Kerns AK240 portable player, I have to surmise here that you have little or no current personal experience with either. If so, like you did with your post #159 when you mentioned your speed light examples, you would have named some different models, and shown some familiarity with them. By just invoking the old "vinyl is better than digital" trope, you're injecting it into this discussion because you feel it will score debate points for you.

It won't. Now, this isn't to say that we can't prefer vinyl (even something modest like a Pro-ject RM 1.3 Genie for $499 can make great pressings and recordings sound superb), but even I realize that the best vinyl pressings and recordings are not superior to the best recorded and mastered digital recordings. (unless you prefer the kind of distortion that is introduced by getting sound physically extracted via friction of a stylus against grooves in a record to your ears, and further that you see that distortion as being superior to digital).

The part of post #161 where you wrote "And even then it generally won't sound as good as something larger. You can't get the bas response and over all range. Hand me a pair of earbuds that will be able to reproduce the tone of a bass that's dropped tuned to hell and back and that can replicate the growl and feel out of a nice tube amp" makes it sound like you have more general issues with digital music rather than just tiny earbuds. I could have ended that comment just as accurately with "of a nice solid state amp". Tube amps are available for desktop PCs/Macs, for use a headphone amps, that you can get for under $80 (and are very compact). This quote above needs more clarification. Do you have a problem with earbuds, or with headphones, or with digital music?

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Can be, if you get one specced right. Most desktop chips have a faster cache unless you get an older version, better GPUs (even the older ones), better cooling, the ability to connect more peripherals.

So you're admitting that the Air isn't inherently worse due to being portable, it depends on what you get. Ergo, "portability over quality" is dependent upon what is purchased.

Depends what you're using it for and you're also paying ten times the amount for it.

There's that word "depends" again.

even better than vinyl on a good record player? Because I'd like to see you stick one of those in your pocket.

Vinyl is actually not better than digital. At all. I'd explain myself, but here's a quick resource for you.

http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)

I would have imagined that someone who was a "partner" for a recording studio would know these things.

And even then it generally won't sound as good as something larger. You can't get the bas response and over all range. Hand me a pair of earbuds that will be able to reproduce the tone of a bass that's dropped tuned to hell and back and that can replicate the growl and feel out of a nice tube amp.

Um. Two things.

1) There are plenty of IEMs that can go down into the subsonic range. Like... lots. And you don't even need to spend a lot of money on them. Actually it's quite easy for earbuds by virtue of not needing to vibrate nearly as much air as a full sized speaker.

2) IEMs can use a tube amp (although due to their low impedance it's not very popular). Remember the amp is just a signal processor, not a speaker, so when that bass guitar is using a tube amp, the amp isn't actually reproducing the sound itself, it's passing the "growl and feel" along to the speakers. I mean aside from the fact that a tube amp isn't inherently superior to a solid state amp anyway (this goes back to the vinyl > digital fallacy from earlier).

Signal -> amp -> speakers. Once again, someone as well versed in audio as you should know things like this.

You can keep ranting as much as you like, but back to my original post on the Beats, so they're high quality headphones that outperform everything in their price range? How about you rant on about that?

Never said that. I just found it amusing that someone who freely confesses to not knowing much about headphones decided to make such blanket declarations about headphones. Your further attempts to prove what you do know have... well, they've fallen flat.

I honestly don't know how much else I can explain here.

----------

And about Beats? I do agree with your comment in post #150 that Beats are overpriced for what you get. They play bloated bass, little else, break easily (especially the wiring and headband components). They sell well because of rap cache, and that's it! Even Bose makes better headphones for the money. If someone is a basshead and wants to spend $300 on cans that will destroy the Beats lines, I recommend the V Moda Crossfade M100s all day long. Hell, you can get 'em at Best Buy now! Now that Apple's acquired them, I can only hope that they improve their sound quality to get them more in line with established standards for sound quality.

No lie dude, the latest generation of Beats is pretty good. You can find reviews of the 2013 studios from guys like Part Time Audiophile (a man with an audio armada that would make all of our equipment combined look like chump change) who are impressed with the things. I returned my Solo2s not because they were bad, but because they functioned pretty much the same as my M100s and aren't quite as good.

My thing is with this whole jimjam is I get bugged when people let the brand slapped on the side affect their opinion of the product. People who see the (b) and howl that it's crap and no one should ever have them are no different than people who get stars in their eyes and think Beats are heaven in audio form. To me.

Besides, I'd rather wear Beats the Grado any day of the week. At least at the same price range. Not even a contest.

 

[VI™]

Never said that. I just found it amusing that someone who freely confesses to not knowing much about headphones decided to make such blanket declarations about headphones. Your further attempts to prove what you do know have... well, they've fallen flat.

I honestly don't know how much else I can explain here.

I made a comparison of Beats to the Icon brand. How is that a blanket statement about headphones?

 

[SomeGuyDude]

I made a comparison of Beats to the Icon brand. How is that a blanket statement about headphones?

You made a blanket statement about how the brand is just overpriced junk with a name on it, and then followed it up by admitting you're not a headphone guy.

The long and short of it is that Beats aren't tops, but they're not crap, either. At least not any more. IMO if you were to make a big spectrum of headphones that exist in the $200-300 area, Beats land somewhere in the middle, averaging out people who love bass from people who don't.

Plus, as an audiophile, I love (and I do mean love) what Beats has done for the headphone world. Even as short as five years ago, $300 headphones were the purview of the basement hobbyist. Best Buy wasn't carrying two aisles worth of big premium headphones. They had a section called "mp3 player accessories" that was full of crummy little earbuds and a couple on-ear offerings from Sony and Philips. VModa was around, but all they made were really, REALLY flimsy earbuds like the Vibe and Bass Freq.

Man, when I was in high school, the "best headphones" you could get at the store were about $40 and probably sounded like listening through a telephone compared to now.

Zap forward to the present day. Not only did Beats absolutely blow the doors down on how much people would spend on luxury headphones, but they made headphones COOL. Oh sure, for plenty of people they want the headphones mostly because of the (b)rand, but that's hardly different from kids who want iPhones and iPads, is it?

Just think about it, man. Best Buy carries top end offerings from Shure and Sennheiser now. Their Magnolia imprint sells Bowers & Wilkin, Denon, Audio Technica and AKG. Places like AC Gears in NYC (where I'll be heading this weekend) are big ol' headphone specialty stores because people realize how AMAZING headphones are and are willing to drop the money on them.

And that's helped the brands out! Holy crap man, there are two brands that I'm aware of that literally just sell MODIFICATIONS of another product! MrSpeakers and ZMF just modify the Fostex tr50p and sell the results at a premium. That industry NEVER would have existed in the pre-Beats era.

Sorry for the rant. Work is slow today and I get really fired up about headphones.

 

[Irishman]

You made a blanket statement about how the brand is just overpriced junk with a name on it, and then followed it up by admitting you're not a headphone guy.

The long and short of it is that Beats aren't tops, but they're not crap, either. At least not any more. IMO if you were to make a big spectrum of headphones that exist in the $200-300 area, Beats land somewhere in the middle, averaging out people who love bass from people who don't.

Plus, as an audiophile, I love (and I do mean love) what Beats has done for the headphone world. Even as short as five years ago, $300 headphones were the purview of the basement hobbyist. Best Buy wasn't carrying two aisles worth of big premium headphones. They had a section called "mp3 player accessories" that was full of crummy little earbuds and a couple on-ear offerings from Sony and Philips. VModa was around, but all they made were really, REALLY flimsy earbuds like the Vibe and Bass Freq.

Man, when I was in high school, the "best headphones" you could get at the store were about $40 and probably sounded like listening through a telephone compared to now.

Zap forward to the present day. Not only did Beats absolutely blow the doors down on how much people would spend on luxury headphones, but they made headphones COOL. Oh sure, for plenty of people they want the headphones mostly because of the (b)rand, but that's hardly different from kids who want iPhones and iPads, is it?

Just think about it, man. Best Buy carries top end offerings from Shure and Sennheiser now. Their Magnolia imprint sells Bowers & Wilkin, Denon, Audio Technica and AKG. Places like AC Gears in NYC (where I'll be heading this weekend) are big ol' headphone specialty stores because people realize how AMAZING headphones are and are willing to drop the money on them.

And that's helped the brands out! Holy crap man, there are two brands that I'm aware of that literally just sell MODIFICATIONS of another product! MrSpeakers and ZMF just modify the Fostex tr50p and sell the results at a premium. That industry NEVER would have existed in the pre-Beats era.

Sorry for the rant. Work is slow today and I get really fired up about headphones.

In my view, opening up the premium headphone market to more people is the only good thing that the Beats brand has done. Unfortunately, they haven't done so by selling premium headphones. THAT is what I want Apple to fix.

----------

No lie dude, the latest generation of Beats is pretty good. You can find reviews of the 2013 studios from guys like Part Time Audiophile (a man with an audio armada that would make all of our equipment combined look like chump change) who are impressed with the things.

The size of someone's audio collection is not a measure of how reputable a reviewer and measurer he/she is. Additionally, I watched his video Youtube review, and he gave his impressions, but didn't do any measurements of the headphones, which, in professional electronics reviewing, is a big no-no. HE further admitted that he had had no experience prior with Beats, so he had nothing to compare it to.

 

[VI™]

You made a blanket statement about how the brand is just overpriced junk with a name on it, and then followed it up by admitting you're not a headphone guy.

I made a comparison to another popular brand that started out as more of a form over function brand that eventually increased in quality and you fly off the handle for some reason or another? Having a bad day?

they remind me of the Icon motorcycle clothing brand. It's first and foremost a fashion brand that goes with form over funtion. Their jackets, helmets, and gloves (metal plated knuckles? Really?) are over the top and scream look at me but their quality doesn't hold up to brands like Dianese and Arai that have proven themselves through multiple racing tours time and time again. But your average rider that will never see the track wants something cool, so they go out and spend extra money on an inferior product so that when they see another Icon buddy, they can nod at each other in recognition of how cool they are.

With that being said, I believe Icon's quality has improved since it's inception, so hopefully Beats will too. With the new headphones supposedly offering less bass and better dynamic range, it's a step in the right direction.

And you started making up all sorts of assumptions and personal attacks. You hear of selective hearing, selective reading?

 

[SomeGuyDude]

You said you hope Beats will improve. They already have. But again, you're not a headphones guy so of course you didn't know that.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Side note.

Portable with lots of quality.

 

[berthaconners]

Wow. That was a vicious argument.

 

[NTurner42]

I just picked up a pair of the Studio Wireless after looking for a nice set of Bluetooth cans and I love their sound. I was actually very surprised when I tried them out, my expectations were terrible from all the negativity over the years. I can even remember the old Studio model, sounded very muddy, but I suggest everyone give them a second chance. Also considering a Beats Pill XL after hearing a set at a friends house, Best Buy does have them on sale. lol

 

[AppleDApp]

Great read.

What are some alternatives to Beats?

 

[loon3y]

well I'm buying my beat pros again after i lost mine.


i really dont give a **** if other 'cheaper' headphones are better.


who needs a burberrry or lacoste shirt right? when you can get the same style at your local swap meet for 20 bucks

 

[TheGenerous]

try AIAIAI studio headphones

 

[JoelTheSuperior]

well I'm buying my beat pros again after i lost mine.


i really dont give a **** if other 'cheaper' headphones are better.


who needs a burberrry or lacoste shirt right? when you can get the same style at your local swap meet for 20 bucks

So you're willing to buy headphones that are objectively worse than other cans which cost half the price for the sake of appearance?

 

[loon3y]

So you're willing to buy headphones that are objectively worse than other cans which cost half the price for the sake of appearance?

objectively worse? they still produce quality sound, are you truly going to see the difference from Beats and Bose headsets? to the point where it bothers you?


Thats like telling the difference from the resolutions from iPad 4 and the iPad Air.

its just ridiculous.



so are you saying you only buy clothes from the 99 cent store or walmart? Hey why buy a rolex? you can just buy 60 dollar swatches.


why get a BMW or a benz? just get a 1989 toyota corolla. Hey why buy a rMBP, when theres other PC laptops that have better specifications?


my beat pros are perfect, they have heavy bass yet a clean sound for my music.

go buy your cheaper but better headphones.

what does that pertain to me? i can afford it and it looks nice, so I'm buying it.

and I'm From LA, grew up listening to NWA, Spice 1, Everyone from death row, Black Brother records, etc etc.

why the hell wouldn't i want to support dre? hes a childhood icon for me.

i bet theres some basketball shoes that are technically better than Kobes, but I'm a laker fan and i grew up with watching kobe, i want to support him and plus his kobe 5's were one of the lightest shoes I've ever played with.


its can basically be labeled jewelry as well. anyways have fun convincing people to not to buy beats, because it isn't going to work.

especially if you buy something for a friend who may love west coast rap and loved Dre as a kid, as gift he'd be more appreciative about getting beats and the fact that its not cheap tells you gave some effort to it.

rather than buying a cheaper headphone thats an unknown brand. People work, i dont know how old are you or if you have a job or not but buying beats birthday gift or christmas gift for a friend is no big deal.


seems like your the type that would deny buying your kids Beat headphones because theres cheaper better headphones that are better.

lol, it doesnt matter what you think its better or what is, its what people want.

 

[Meister]

I personaly own some off brand 17,- headphones because I cant hear the differenc anyway.

However friends of mine, who used to work in the music industry, can tell the difference.
They told me that the studio standard and mostly undisputed best headphones are bowers&wilkins.
They heavily frown upon the beats brand, because it doesnt reproduce the sound properly.
Also the build quality is crap.

If Id spend so much dough on headphones, Id go with the best. "Beats" are not it.

 

[berthaconners]

I personaly own some off brand 17,- headphones because I cant hear the differenc anyway.

However friends of mine, who used to work in the music industry, can tell the difference.
They told me that the studio standard and mostly undisputed best headphones are bowers&wilkins.
They heavily frown upon the beats brand, because it doesnt reproduce the sound properly.
Also the build quality is crap.

If Id spend so much dough on headphones, Id go with the best. "Beats" are not it.

Yeah, I can't tell the difference. I agree, if you want the best, Beats are not the best option.

 

[JoelTheSuperior]

objectively worse? they still produce quality sound, are you truly going to see the difference from Beats and Bose headsets? to the point where it bothers you?


Thats like telling the difference from the resolutions from iPad 4 and the iPad Air.

Bose aren't exactly what I would describe as quality cans either to be perfectly honest.

In terms of would it bother me? Honestly yes. If I was just listening to music casually whilst programming or whatever, I'd probably survive but when performing / recording etc, yeah, it'd definitely bother me.

Your comparison isn't particularly valid to be honest - have a look at the graph below and tell me that there isn't a huge difference:

In all honesty if you're happy with your Beats that's fine, but don't try to imply that they're high end headphones or that you can't hear the difference between them and cans with a more natural frequency response.

Equally, if you like the sound of beats that's fine too, but in terms of accuracy they're downright poor compared to other much cheaper headphones. The Beyerdynamic DT770s aren't far off the DT880s in terms of raw frequency response and cost around $125 on Amazon for example.

 

[loon3y]

Bose aren't exactly what I would describe as quality cans either to be perfectly honest.

In terms of would it bother me? Honestly yes. If I was just listening to music casually whilst programming or whatever, I'd probably survive but when performing / recording etc, yeah, it'd definitely bother me.

Your comparison isn't particularly valid to be honest - have a look at the graph below and tell me that there isn't a huge difference:

In all honesty if you're happy with your Beats that's fine, but don't try to imply that they're high end headphones or that you can't hear the difference between them and cans with a more natural frequency response.

Equally, if you like the sound of beats that's fine too, but in terms of accuracy they're downright poor compared to other much cheaper headphones. The Beyerdynamic DT770s aren't far off the DT880s in terms of raw frequency response and cost around $125 on Amazon for example.

The beat Pros are high end headphones. What the hell is "mosnter beats by dr.dre headphones"


It doesnt state which model and i acknowledged here and before that the studios were never up to par (the originals, havent checked out the 2.0) You do know this whole time i wasnt talking about the "studios" their flagship product.

I havent used the DT770s so i wouldnt know the difference.I just tested with the M50's the ones that were supposed to be the "beats killer"


it does not step up o the pros. the sound was distinctively better. the M50s were supposed to concentrate on vocals, but you can just do the same by lowering the bass on the EQ when using the Beat Pros.


As for the M50s you cant. Beats are over priced, same with all brand name things, but to say at least the Beat Pros are inferior is incorrect.

But the graph, come on. it doesnt even show the model number apposed to the DT880. Whoever made that did that on purpose.


Have you ever used the Beat Pros? on CDQ or better quality tracks? it sounds nice and theres no denying that.

Of course there probably is headphones that are cheaper that may produce better quality, but the difference is going to be miniscule.