Perhaps you, like me, were thrown because the first line is actually wrong. "The SFO airport gate" is actually "one of the gates at SFO", which is to say, it's a gate in San Francisco Airport. The better phrasing would be "gate for SFO".
With that change, the first sentence lands perfectly for me (at least as far as I can tell). A single word can make or break the whole thing. Jokes are interesting like that.
Exactly lol. Spent a minute trying to wrap my head around how the hell would one be able to find the gate to an airport while driving/taking public transport, by looking at other people's headphones.
100% I own enough Lululemon men's gear and have zero regrets - for longhaul flights nothing really beats the comfort of Lululemon/Prana pants. And they are super functional - pockets with zippers are super handy for AirPods, Passport, wallet etc.
As someone who has many coolers, I've never understood the Yeti craze except in certain situations. Yes, they can keep ice ice for a crazy amount of time, but it's rare to need ice stay ice for that long. For a typical boat day, I'd rather have a cooler with larger internal dimensions (and hundreds of dollars cheaper).
This method is also effective for finding the Austin gates during SXSW, while at SFO. There’s a noticeably higher concentration of early adopters than the default airport mix and it’s apparent from a couple gates away.
Headphones market is a crowded place. Apple with this expensive headset may be addressing very small segment of the users. I'll wait for SE model. $500 for headphones doesn't sound good to me :)
I think this is actually a fantastic place for Apple. I'm happy to trash Apple where appropriate and I've got plenty of complaints. I think Apple does it's best when the integration of hardware and software is really important and there is a very low tolerance for, I won't say bugs, but issues.
They're headphones. I want to put them on and they need to make noise. I'm not dealing with connectivity issues, battery issues, etc. Sure they're $500 but when Apple gets it right I'm happy to pay $500 for something that works than $300 for the first try that I eventually stop using because of some issue or another then another try at $350 for something a little better only to finally throw in the towel an pay the $500 to Apple that might not be perfect but hits it on enough points that I want to use them.
Battery, I need to be able to easily and quickly know what the status is and I need to know that if I plugged them in before I go to bed I'll be good to go all day, the next day and I don't have to think about charging.
Connectivity. When I go to use them I need them to connect and work. No fiddling around with loss of connection or not connecting in the first place.
With the spatial audio they're actually cheap if you figure I'm done with any Dolby Atmos, 9.1, 7.1, 5.1 etc stand alone setup. I'm watching movies with this. I'm tired of all the speakers, decoder, amp, wires, sub, constant upgrades. Compare this to even the least expensive stand alone 5.1 system and it's a very inexpensive alternative.
I bought a $100 pair of bluetooth Sennheisers that have a battery life that seems to be measured not in hours, but in days. I use them all day every day while working in the office, at home, or coffee shop. Music sounds great and so do movies. Never have to worry about the bluetooth connnection, pairs to my Mac or to my work laptop just fine. And they got to me with Amazon Prime.
You do not need to spend $500 if all you need is headphones that do their job.
> You do not need to spend $500 if all you need is headphones that do their job.
Its amazing to me the number of Apple fanboys in this thread that seem to think that every other pair of headphones out there is completely broken, and nothing will "just work". This has been a solved problem for like a decade.
It's amazing to me how many folks seem to have no clue about what folks value in the apple ecosystem.
Call folks fanboys (I use windows / linux all day for my job by choice).
Do your "solved problem" bluetooth headphones allow EASY audio sharing when the kid is sleeping and you want to watch something with your wife? These are two bluetooth devices on same audio stream.
Does your solved problem bluetooth headphones RELIABLY connect to your current device (without having to unpaid with another device). That is game changing.
The problem is, folks have listened to folks like you so many times and gotten BURNED so many times. Oh, it "should" work you say. Total BS at least 20% of the time.
I won't buy the max'es because I have no need for something that nice. But the $159 for the airpods? Slam dunk.
You should go back and listen to the criticism of the airpods when they came out - overpriced, stupid, whatever. Then check out sales numbers.
Do that again with the apple watch maybe? Started slow, but I'm curious what their top competitor is by $ revenue - they have just improved and improved.
Go ahead and call me a fanboy but... Apple really nails the "it just works".
I'm a software engineer, and I'm happy to get my hands dirty with some code. But when it comes to my devices, I really don't want to waste my time trying to figure out why this or that device, doesn't pair with, or work well with, my other device.
Apple just does this better than anyone else.
I recently got an Apple watch and the setup process was sublime. Pairing with all my other devices, was effortless. Instantly my watch was "mine" with everything I need on it.
The LTE setup was mostly painless too. There was a bug in the process that was on Verizon's end, but other than that, getting my phone paired to my number was a breeze.
The pairing with my phone, and my mac, is what makes this whole ecosystem special. It just works, and it works pretty damn well. Yes, you can get most of this functionality on a windows or linux machine, with an android phone, airpod replicas, and an android based smart watch but the fluidity of the apple integration is unmatched.
This is what (some) people are willing to pay more for.
I have a different take on this. I'm an apple machine user. I work on an iMac Pro everyday and have used mac/ios for over a decade. But i've also extensively used Android, Windows, Linux etc extensively.
From what I've experienced it is true that when using apple with apple, it just works. that is true and i won't dispute that. they own the ecosystem so they can handle the integration well, obiously. But the opposite is also true. When using apple with non apple, it (sometimes) just doesn't work or works poorly. When i use the same device on Windows or Android (linux is a different beast), it just works when it won't with iOS or Mac. and sometimes i just want to use a brand thats not apple...
I think for many apple users these days, they believe that Android/Windows still have the problems they faced back in 2009 and havent extensively used either since switching.
Android pairs newer bluetooth devices essentially the same way apple pairs airpods now and windows doesnt still have all the issues from windows vista that made them switch in the first place and has support for way more devices than apple ever will.
I'm not trying to make the point that one is better than the other, my point for apple users is that the experience on windows/android isn't as bad as they think it is and my point for windows/android users is that you're not missing out on much or anything at all from the apple ecosystem.
Buy devices that fit your use case and budget. its as simple as that.
I think you've nailed it. I also made this observation. So many time I'll be talking to another dev about macOS v. linux for example, and they'll say something like, "I don't want to have to compile my kernel" or they'll describe something that makes it clear they haven't tried any Linux distro in a long time. I'll usually ask, "when was the last time you tried it?" and at that point they'll usually realize what they're doing and say something like, "It's been probably 15 years, maybe things are better now?"
Yes, things are better. If I compared the first iPhone to an Pixel 4, the iPhone isn't going to compare nicely. It's always worth making sure you are comparing apples to apples (no pun intended ;-))
I've recently given Linux another try, for use on a machine meant as a media server, and also to drive my family "video call station" (i.e., combine big TV, webcam and a bluetooth audio widget with mic and speakers so that the kids can talk to their grandparents in COVID times). Went with the most main stream distro, Ubuntu 20.04.
Result: couldn't get the Bluetooth conference widget working. Googled around for hours and tried all kinds of things, including compiling and installing kernel modules and replacing the bluetooth stack. Nothing worked. No, this is not an exotic non-standard protocol, it's a standard one (I think aptX or so? sorry, forgot the details again already; but I googled around and found lots of people with similar issues, and then many "solutions", none of which worked; see above)
Anyway, I am back to plugging in my MacBook each time we want to video conference, and will soon install Windows on the media server (no matter how much I hate the thought).
I really want to use Linux for this kind of stuff, but it's 2020 and I can't get a Bluetooth widget working that works flawlessly on various Macs, Windows machines, iPhone, iPad and an Android phone.
So while things may be better, they are still far from where they could be, I am afraid.
With "media server" I generally meant: "device hooked up to the speaker and AV receiver for video playback, couch surfing, perhaps the occasional game (mostly via emulators).
Yeah, adding the microphone and camera is going beyond that, but it's convenient to use the computer already hooked to the TV instead of, you know, hooking up yet another one. Also, how does Airplay give me access to the camera mounted on top of the TV (an old phone, BTW)? Also, how is that relevant for my comment at all? :-)
Airplay can share a screen and through that it can share a FaceTime call - or at least I thought it could and Googling suggests it can. This entirely depends on your ‘old phone’ being an iPhone.
I tried Linux recently (Ubuntu, I believe it was 19.10 but might've been 18.04 lts). Within minutes of booting I was searching for answers to questions that one should never have to ask (specifically, it was something to do with sound - it wasn't outputting or it was going over HDMI instead of the plugged in Aux Jack.) Linux may have gotten better, but it feels just as unfinished and confusing to me as it did 20 years ago when I first booted knoppix.
Oh it’s plenty obtuse, but you can get a lot working in a very reliable fashion.
My daily driver is a Mac but Ubuntu is great for messing about - it really is baffling how simple things can turn into hours of pain though.
> they'll describe something that makes it clear they haven't tried any Linux distro in a long time.
I use Linux for work.
In Ubuntu 20 air pod pros still don’t pair properly - I can use the earphones but not the headset microphone.
Then there are minor annoyances like plugging in an
external monitor and keyboard to a closed laptop (thinkpad) and not having it wake up (need to open and close the case), or closing the case but then the power management doesn’t work properly so if it’s not plugged in to power, then when I open it the next day the battery is drained and the laptop has shutdown - losing any unsaved state.
Finally (and this is the main one preventing me from using Linux on my personal laptop) Chinese fonts on Linux are awful. Not only are the default fonts ugly but applications do a poor job of rendering them, often getting baselines offsets between subsequent characters wrong, making characters on the same line jump around.
It’s altogether a subpar experience especially compared to macOS.
> In Ubuntu 20 air pod pros still don’t pair properly - I can use the earphones but not the headset microphone.
Do you really blame Linux over Apple for that? Bluetooth on Linux isn't great, that's totally true, but a big source of problems is the device makers. They often test against only the system they are targeting, and leave the rest. Nearly every bluetooth implementation has issues, but the Linux one is never tested/developed with like others.
> Then there are minor annoyances like plugging in an external monitor and keyboard to a closed laptop (thinkpad) and not having it wake up (need to open and close the case), or closing the case but then the power management doesn’t work properly so if it’s not plugged in to power, then when I open it the next day the battery is drained and the laptop has shutdown - losing any unsaved state.
I agree, this is insanely stupid. By all means I don't think things are perfect yet, but they are definitely better than they used to be. There are also easy things you can do to avoid these things, such as sleeping your laptop from the Gnome widget (or just run `systemctl suspend -i`) and it works every time. just open the lid to resume working. It's annoying that you have to do that for sure, but in my opinion learning simple workflow changes like that aren't a big deal in exchange for the FLOSS aspects, but everyone is different. Choice is what makes things great!
I don't blame anyone, and I understand the reasons, but at the end of the day I still can't use devices I can use everywhere else, and I'm reminded of that daily when I need to plug wired headphones in instead.
Power-management issues I've learned to work around - but again is something that requires regular actions/changes in behaviour that serve as a continual reminder that there are issues.
Chinese font issues I've given up on entirely and I just have the UI in English.
Don't get me wrong, macOS has plenty of issues too, and it feels like the overall software quality has been in a gradual state of decline for at least a decade, but it doesn't have the same continual reminders of issues that I get when using Linux, and the fonts always look nice regardless of language.
I recently had an SSD failure and tried using Ubuntu 20.10 to fix my (heavily tweaked to get things mostly-working) older Ubuntu installation. After many hours fiddling with startup settings I still cannot get the live USB to boot to anything other than a black screen. This is a ~2008 graphics card with mature open source drivers. I can get a console if using safe graphics mode but then no network connectivity either. Who knows about sound, haven't got there yet. All the same issues as 15-20 years ago.
When I was last using this machine regularly, most biannual upgrades broke one of these three things anyway (and, no: the tweaks were not obscure things that caused the breakage, and several failed attempts were made to revert them, report them, or look into the causes, and they obviously don't affect the live USB).
On earphones I reserve my judgement since my Sony 1000XM2 works really well and I don't have advanced needs like switching devices constantly or sharing the audio with another person.
On desktop OS or smartphone I cannot agree with this sentiment though. I used Arch Linux (arguably the best Linux experience I've had by far) on Thinkpad for 3 years and used Nexus/Pixel for 5+ years. Starting from last year I finally had enough and switched back to Macbook + iPhone. God were the devices much, much reliable and my life much easier. At least I didn't have to worry about random stuffs like Bluetooth disconnection, lack of proper HiDPI support or the camera taking 5 seconds to start/simply freezing.
I am super excited to be jumping back into Linux as of this month. But I will say, even though the issues are different, I still have a lot of issues. Things do not "just work." Some of that is simple expectation setting.
With Linux, you know that something can work if you just give it enough elbow grease. The same is true on macOS, but the ecosystem does not tempt you unless its something you actually need. On Linux, the ecosystem says, "oh, that weird thing you want to do you? YES! You can do it! It's normal! Go for it!" And then you do, and you have issues, and everyone is like "oh that sucks but also you were trying to do a weird thing." The blessed path is less clear.
Have taken the blessed path on Ubuntu 20.04LTS with a Lenovo workstation, however on updating the bootloader spontaneously decided to Bork itself. Could possibly try and fix it, however this is not something I want to mess with right now so currently using WSL v2 and Docker on Windows 10 and not having any problems. It is nice to be able to add 2/4/8gb of storage and 128gb of ram for dirt cheap, something that is not possible with a mac though.
Seriously- who is more likely to put app ads in my start menu (candy crush and friends) when I pay for the ‘pro’ version of their os? Apple or windows?
Can you guarantee my Samsung TV won’t start showing me ads? Hint - they already do.
My next Samsung smart phone from Verizon won’t have trash bloat ware on it and won’t prompt me endlessly for Samsung pay?
That I can get an item fixed easily at any of their retail stores?
Sure - stuff out there works - but figuring out the perfect phone carrier / phone provider for example is annoying. Where is download boost on Verizon? Oh, it’s disabled.
Even apples phone experience is much more consistent across all carriers. Why these other folks bundle 10 Verizon and another batch of junk themselves as user value enhancing boggles my mind
> Android pairs newer bluetooth devices essentially the same way apple pairs airpods now
This isn’t really the part of Apple’s Bluetooth that I appreciate. What I find immensely useful is when you want to switch the headphones from one device to another. Apple’s solution isn’t 100% accurate, but on any given day, it’s common for me to switch my AirPod Pros from my phone to my watch to my laptop to my Apple TV. Before I switched over to all Apple gear, I needed to either spend 5 minutes re-pairing my headphones or (what I really did) have dedicated Bluetooth headphones for my TV.
This is the major benefit for me... the seamless switching, not the pairing.
Nowadays we can switch a device connect to headphone by connecting from the device. It's not good as like Apple's proprietary solution, but the rest of the world is also improving since 2010. I also like NFC but it's less adopted.
Of course everyone's experience is different but Apple's software is pretty far from "Just Works". Especially their macos with the recent update to Big Sur as well as multiple OS updates during Catalina. In the 1 year I have owned a 16 inch macbook pro it's bricked on me twice because of their "Just Works" OS updates and had to take it to the Apple store to get it reset. Not to mention the issue of not being apple to open non-apple apps at one point due to a bug on their side. I have had issues with Windows and Linux, but nothing close to bricking my machine. It seems to me Apple's way of doing business is if it's not an Apple product, we have no interest. They really want to lock you in which is fine cause they are a business but that mindset is extremely dangerous in my opinion.
Yeah, I didn't have the "it just works" experience. The last iPhone I owned was an iPhone 3s, and an update nearly bricked it by slowing everything down on the phone.
I guess "it just works" as long as you keep upgrading to their latest. That's true with deprecations in every product line, but it's not something I'd pay a premium for, especially when it doesn't exist.
My experience with Apple recently has been quite rocky. I recommended a family purchase a MacBook Pro but they ended up getting bit by the keyboard bug, which basically compromises the entire experience really badly.
I tried the Apple smart home ecology on the argument of privacy and I’m getting frustrated at the disparity in quality vs Google. For example, there’s a noticeable probability of multiple devices picking up AND redundantly entering a command, like adding a reminder. Often, often times, another Siri device will take over from the local one in front of me and say, “Sorry, I can’t do that,” even though it could if the right device picked up.
Apple is still a top recommendation but they aren’t a no brainer. The more you use your brain the less you end up on the bad side of the Apple ecology, like with the sticky keyboard issue.
It's not true. Take the Apple TV vs Roku. Roku is so easy to use, so reliable, similar capabilities. They just nail it. Apple TV's remote is so confusing error prone and unintuitive my wife refuses to touch it, and I make mistakes with it much more than Roku. We put up with it only for the exclusives (Apple TV, HBO Max) and Apple only features (Apple device mirroring)
Same, everything else feels… "stiff" and somewhat clunky compared to an ATV4K, and the next best option Roku has serious privacy issues.
I will say though that oddly, the Siri remote got a little worse in its ATV4K revision — most notably, triggering a jump back/forward 30s is much harder on the newer remote. As a result I've paired my old original Dev Kit remote with the ATV4K, which works beautifully.
Well I like my Bose headphones, which use a single AAA battery but they are corded. Wireless anything is a hard no for me due to poor experience with it. I know a lot of people disagree.
So why are you even posting in a topic about a pair of wireless headphones? You're not the market. You have no recent experience with similar products. What was your point?
Maybe if you stay in the ecosystem. I used an end of 2013 Macbook Pro at work that was bought for a research project. Latest hardware at the time. Had all kinds of problems connecting it to my Android phone. Apple "just works" is a myth. I have had as many problems with Apple hardware as with most other hardware. The chances that some random device will "just work" is probably highest for Windows 10. I'm saying that as a Linux user (by choice) and sometimes forced Windows 10 and OSX user.
I also recall some issues when developing Arduino stuff because of the USB connection to the Arduino.
If you want the best platform for connecting random vendors together, I would probably go with Windows/Microsoft.
If you want the best platform for seamless vertical integration nothing is better than Apple. That's why people get so excited about new Apple products. It's a new shiny toy that they know will work excellently within their ecosystem.
Not to discount your experiences, but I use FreeBSD, Windows, MacOS, iOS, and Android devices, professionally and personally, and I don't have many problems getting these devices to talk to each other.
>Had all kinds of problems connecting it to my Android phone.
MacOS doesn't have native MTP support. You can use a third party tool on MacOS or an SMB client on Android.
I loved my AirPods. Then the batteries gave up the ghost, and I was left with small, expensive, probably toxic electronic garbage. It ruined the brand for me and I can't imagine buying another pair of AirPods.
- Do an in warranty battery replacement (within 1 year)
- Pay a repair shop or apple for a new battery.
- Apple runs one of the most comprehensive recycling and trade-in programs out there. Every store offers both trade-in value for devices that have it and free recycling for those that don't.
Surely it will be possible to replace them in repair shops? Not for the home gamer obviously, but neither are screen repairs - and I’m really happy with my third party screen repair.
My AirPods also lack battery capacity now, to a degree that it’s annoyingly short. I accidentally came over a second pair, but yeah a new pair of earphones every two to three years sounds expensive to me.
Problem is, they work so spectacularly well otherwise that I don’t know how that I could stand anything else. Part of this is that Apple seem to intentionally make other headsets work less well. For example by not routing calls through the headset by default, such a joke.
But at least it’s small? I mean, one dead laptop is the equivalent of many lifetimes worth of AirPods in terms of waste.
Of all the things that could be disposable this seems like the least concerning. A Tesla contains orders of magnitudes more plastic, electronics, and batteries that will one day be junk and you will go through maybe 3 sets of AirPods before you trade in for a newer model EV?
Cars in general are pretty wasteful, even outside of the manufacturing process. I'd be surprised if Teslas wasted more raw 'energy' when totaled compared to the waste caused by extracting, refining, transporting, and then burning oil and all the human labor that goes into that.
I'm all-in on Apple, and I don't see that changing. And generally, the above has been my experience too. But I recently bought a wireless magic keyboard and trackpad for a standing workstation with a monitor in the corner of our living room. I'd expected to be able to switch between our two laptops seamlessly so that whoever happened to need it could use it, but no - you have to explicitly unpair the keyboard and trackpad from one computer before re-pairing it to the other. That means finding it wherever my wife left it, turning it on or at a minimum logging in and all the rest of the dance, every single time. It drives me insane.
I have a shitty $50 brand x bluetooth speaker that does it better than this. I want to listen to some music, I pair with it. My wife wants to listen to some music later? She just pairs to it and she's done. It doesn't seem that hard to get right.
Could be bad design, or could be good shared-space / privacy-focused design. Letting someone else yoink a connected input device in a hypothetical coffee shop or office with 50 people nearby is a recipe for annoyance or even for privacy-invasion. (Even if it only lets you grab devices you've previously been paired to, that's still an easy thing in an office where a lot of the equipment is more communal.)
My recollection is that the magic keyboard / trackpad insta-pair if you connect them via wire. Would plugging them each in to a lightning cable for a second to switch their allegiance work better for you than manually unpairing? Obviously it's still a hassle.
I have a Logitech k380 which in my opinion does this in an intuitive way.
There’s 3 dedicated buttons for paired Bluetooth devices (fn + 1,2,3) and hitting them just pairs to the device. And you can reassign a button to another device by holding fn+1,2,3.
When you turn it on it pairs to the last device it was paired to.
New Logitech master mouse I bought does it really well. One button under to switch between three computers.
That said... I really hope we can move away from Bluetooth, it’s the least reliable and most errorprone thing on todays computers.
I don't have much experience with Apple stuff, but recently I was tasked with getting a Macbook onto the most recent OS revision.
I actually never managed to do it, and had to call for backup. In order to eventually do it, this other person had to install multiple updates, each of which seemed to only be accessible from some different piece of UI, and a lot of the process seemed to trial and error and dead-ends.
I don't think Apple stuff "just works" nearly as well as people claim it does.
Having performed every OS update from OS X Jaguar (10.2) to macOS Big Sur, I'm surprised by your experience. macOS releases have always been complete and not in place upgrades over previous versions.
Once the OS releases became free and were no longer distributed on physical media there was a time when releases would be downloaded from the App Store. OS updates have moved from a dedicated Software Update app, to the App Store app and now into System Preferences. For I'm not sure how long, OS installations have been effectively click and approve the license with no other input required for the past decade (and with increasingly less information displayed during the install process).
I've recently installed OS X 10.4 Tiger (from 2005) and Windows 8 Pro, both from original media to blank drives, the OS X installation was much less frustrating (most notably because I didn't have to dig up a license key).
New versions of OS X and macOS have been released as full versions, but in OS X (ie 10.##) the App Store and System Preferences methods are absolutely in-place upgrades. Big Sur is actually a full system update via any method.
"For I'm not sure how long, OS installations have been effectively click and..." agree to legal contract titled 'Terms and Conditions' that, if anyone read them, would clarify a TON of technical misconceptions and speculations (but ironically does not provide much legal clarity).
I've recently installed OS X 10.10 - macOS 11.0 dozens of times each with no eyes or hands, and at least one of the people involved was frustrated every single time. People shouldn't have to have experience installing every release of the last fifteen years to install the latest without struggling.
Because Microsoft has had to pay so much attention to it - and maybe Apple has not - the Windows update process is at the very least far more informative about what’s going on - status of installation before and after any reboot. Updating OS on wife’s MacBook seems like comparatively opaque process. Which is fine if things “always work”, but they don’t.
Yeah I'm a MacOS fanboy, but it really irked me when they got rid of the (hard to find but extremely useful) log output during OS updates a few major versions back. It saved me a lot of time once when it showed that it was backing up files that I didn't care about. Now there is no option to view the log during installation.
I've been fortunate to never run into any failed updates (and I've done many) but as they remove features like this and 32 bit support, I'm looking at other options for my next machine.
Apple just works until it doesn’t. I have used Apple products for many years but a a perfectly fine 2013 15” MBP dying on me because of bad RAM has made me reconsider. That’s something that should be a cheap and quick replacement
It was in excellent condition other than that, so I don’t think age matters. Do you think it’s reasonable to buy a whole new car because the tires are worn out?
I think people do under-value the ecosystem that Apple has built with their devices. The kind of audio sharing you describe is really nice and is legitimately something Apple built (as far as I know). I think Apple often prices their devices on the high end, but that's fine.
That said, I think your description of other bluetooth devices is overly pessimistic. I've had no problems finding bluetooth devices that do basic bluetooth things (connecting, xmitting audio, swapping devices) well. For that reason I basically never recommend Apple products as if they are the only ones to "get it right."
Apple is a premium brand. Folks should consider them if they want a premium product, but it's silly to act as if their competition doesn't offer the same basic functionality for much better prices.
Who do you trust (brand wise) to get it right. Does someone get it right? I'm sure, but my guess is if you did brand survey's, people would KNOW that apple gets it pretty right, and most players don't.
That's partly because apple ignore HN. I need a modulare phone that I can ugprade the ram on. Apple is ignoring you, they seal their phones up with epoxy so they are pretty darn waterproof. But for normal users, this is a positive.
They call out fake third party batteries. OH NO says HN. For normal users, a plus again.
They offer BY FAR the longest and most reliable operating system support. First gen ipad pro's STILL have value! My old android tablet has been unsupported since the DAY I bought it.
Or built in junkware and adware. If I buy a samsung TV can I be pretty sure it won't datamine my viewing habits? Even top competitors turn out to be basically scammers. Will you guarantee me that samsung won't jam ads onto my TV after I buy it?
"Towards the end of 2019, owners have started to voice their dissatisfaction with larger, increasingly obtrusive, and unrelated ads showing up on their Samsung TVs. These include ads for canned beans or discount supermarkets" - this is on $2,500+ frame art TV's etc.
It turns out, despite your claims, these other very large companies selling very expensive items are scamming folks to often, it only takes getting burned ONCE by this to just reduce your circle of trust dramatically.
Is there a perfect bluetooth device out there? Sure. If I go through the amazon listings will I find that device? I doubt it. If I buy from apple will I get it? I think so.
The price of these headphones is ridiculous, I don't defend that. If they are able to sell them at this price I'll be a bit surprised. But overall, they have built user trust up pretty high.
> They call out fake third party batteries. OH NO says HN. For normal users, a plus again.
They make it impossible to replace any component even if the user knows exactly what they're doing. Not, "warning: non-certified component added", but "haha, you thought you could use 3rd party parts? enjoy your brick"
> They offer BY FAR the longest and most reliable operating system support. First gen ipad pro's STILL have value! My old android tablet has been unsupported since the DAY I bought it.
Right, which is why we keep hearing from people who move their macbooks to Linux after Apple drops support. And why Apple technically supports phones forever while releasing OS updates that tank performance.
> Or built in junkware and adware. If I buy a samsung TV can I be pretty sure it won't datamine my viewing habits? Even top competitors turn out to be basically scammers. Will you guarantee me that samsung won't jam ads onto my TV after I buy it?
Right to repair is a real issue that needs to be dealt with but if we consider some other points, when you do an unofficial screen or battery replacement, where does that screen actually come from? I'm not aware of any companies manufacturing brand new iphone displays. So my only thought is they must be mostly from stolen phones and for batteries, also stolen and second hand batteries.
When I have done my own battery replacements on android phones I have found that half the time the battery I got off ebay is already stuffed probably because it was in someones phone for 2 years already.
We need to consider how much use letting users replace their own screens is compared to how much use having users not get their phone stolen is. Perhaps there could be a system where the part ids are tied to an apple id and the original id has to authorize a transfer but then all the displays on ebay would still not work because they are stolen.
Agree with basically all of this. People put on their rose tinted glasses when thinking about products they own and ignore the issues.
I have completely had it with Samsung consumer level devices. Every single one I have had has come with bloatware, discontinued support after a short time and seems to slow down real bad after a few years.
The last samsung product I own is a TV which was perfectly fine on day one but now its so slow I find it hard to change channel or volume and turning it on shows a shitload of HUD bloatware about random streaming services.
And when you point out any of these issues people go "Oh its not a problem you just open the registery editor" or "you pop the back of your tv open and unplug the antenna and then flash this file on to the spi chip"
And don't care if all their other products have to be from Apple. You don't buy "one" Apple product which "just works". You have to buy everything from the ecosystem.
Lately I was checking for some good wireless earplugs. The airpods seem to be the best. But only if you're using an iPhone.
>You don't buy "one" Apple product which "just works".
>You have to buy everything from the ecosystem.
Agreed with the first, heavily disagreed with the second. People often end up buying into the Apple ecosystem after just one product, but not because they have to, but because they feel compelled to.
That was me with original airpods. They worked superbly with android, no complaints whatsoever. So I was like "huh, let me check out their other newer product offerings, it's been quite a while". Eventually, i ended up buying heavily into the ecosystem, and couldn't be happier (sidenote: shared clipboard between your phone and laptop/desktop is amazing).
In fact, I think the timing and everything about original airpods was a stroke of genius. I single-handedly know quite a few people who couldn't care less about Apple ecosystem at all and owned zero Apple devices, but they eventually gave in to try airpods, bought them, and a few years down the road ended up buying an iPhone or a Mac. Some of them were even very staunch pro-android people.
I didn't have an iPhone when I first bought AirPods. They are the best for working out at the gym, so I went for them, after trying some alternatives.
The phone I used them with first was the Pixel 2. They worked perfectly fine. The only heartburn I had was once I had paired them with my Macbook, the bluetooth connection would prefer the Macbook over the phone, which was sometimes annoying.
Others might be upset at the lack of support for the Google Assistant, but for actually using the headphones, there was nothing better, even on Android.
A bit off topic, but I’ve always considered Apple the Disney of tech. What they put out is consistently good, and sometimes even great. While other studios might put out a better movie from time to time than Disney, their batting average is consistently higher than everyone else.
The same with Apple. With few exceptions, I can walk into an Apple store and buy an arbitrary product and be assured that it’s, at the minimum, good. Contrast with someone like Samsung who has great products but also really bad products. I can’t pull a random Samsung out of a hat and be convinced that I’ll like it.
I did not understand the Apple fans until I started using Apple for work stuff. One Apple product alone isn’t anything to write home about, but once you start getting more products, the eco system is above and beyond. Did you highlight a text field on the Apple TV? Your phone vibrates with a full screen keyboard at the ready. Little things like that make it a really nice experience that I haven’t seen other vendors match.
I just got an apple TV and I laughed when I saw that.
Even better, your phone can act as the remote, your airpods can paid (I've heard) etc.
Other than iphone I'm very late to apple's world, but as I get older, I just love that stuff works and I don't feel like I'm getting scammed every second.
Watch shows or movies as a couple while putting baby to sleep or feeding. Also nice when you’re in kitchen and the noise of exhaust hood, microwave, faucet, pressure cooker, and whatnot are going on.
> Do your "solved problem" bluetooth headphones allow EASY audio sharing when the kid is sleeping and you want to watch something with your wife? These are two bluetooth devices on same audio stream.
Yes. Samsung has supported this for years and it has recently upstreamed to all android devices. You can literally do this with any phone and any bluetooth devices, you don't need to fork up $500 for the priviledge.
> Does your solved problem bluetooth headphones RELIABLY connect to your current device (without having to unpaid with another device).
Yes. The Bose QC35 II for example can store multiple bluetooth connections on the device and switch between them. They cost half as much as the Apple cans and are all but guaranteed to sound better than the plastic cones Apple uses.
> You should go back and listen to the criticism of the airpods when they came out - overpriced, stupid, whatever. Then check out sales numbers.
I won't argue that. Apple certainly moves product - there's a significant portion of the population that would buy anything they put out.
> Bose QC35 II for example can store multiple bluetooth connections on the device and switch between them
I have these and it’s annoying to switch them because they’re stored and switched via the app - if you’re switching between more than 2 devices.
The Bose anc also don’t have particularly good audio either so I’m interested to see what the Apple offering sounds like.
In general, there’s a bunch of little annoyances with the current anc devices available (audio quality, uncomfortable, ugly, etc) that I’d like to see Apple fix.
> I have these and it’s annoying to switch them because they’re stored and switched via the app - if you’re switching between more than 2 devices.
Not true, you can cycle between previously connected devices by long holding the power switch in the on position. You can also add new connections and wipe all connections via that switch. I have them and never need to use the app. Read the manual.
Again, this is another thing where Apple improve for an “already solved problem”.
You don’t need to press any buttons. Just interact with your devices as normal and your audio connection switches automatically as if sound were playing through the device’s respective speakers.
In fact there may be a downside because sometimes I actually need to take my AirPods out to verify that audio is still playing through them since the audio just transferred so fast.
The Bose phones also do fast and automatic switching between the last two connected devices. The button shuffle is only needed to switch to other previously connected devices (and that also takes only another few seconds).
Also one of my devices is a Windows PC. I don’t know if AirPods work equally well with non-Apple sources.
I don’t call that an improvement. Having my audio switch from the meeting I’m currently in to the 400th spam call of the day isn’t an improvement over getting to ignore the call entirely.
I've used Bose Bluetooth ANC headphones, and I can't say I've been impressed (though admittedly I don't have much to compare to).
The battery life is pretty much one day's use. The bluetooth connectivity is flaky, and sometimes I hear weird sound artifacts over Bluetooth too. The robot voice announcement whenever a device goes in or out of range, even if I'm currently listening to something from a different device, is super annoying, and there's no way AFAIK to turn it off.
Oh, and another thing: frequently attempts to play audio from one device will be silent because the headphones think another connected device is playing audio … even though it's not.
As other commenters said, the Bose headphones leave a ton of room for improvement. Trying to get them on the correct bluetooth device is something I have to fiddle with every single day. I will gladly pay an extra $200 for something that works more reliably.
But I worry that the "just works" will only kick in for a complete apple ecosystem. I have a bunch of issues with my airpods + Android, that iphone users don't seem to have, for example.
"Does your solved problem bluetooth headphones RELIABLY connect to your current device (without having to unpaid with another device). That is game changing."
Man, I wish my headphones did this. I constantly have to fiddle with my bluetooth settings, have audio come out of my mac or iPhone, sometimes in inappropriate places, even after I've tried to tell the OS to play from headphones. The worst is when switching between my Mac and iPhone, usually I have to unpair one, put my headphones into pairing mode, or at the very least turn bluetooth off on one device.
My headphones are...Apple AirPods. They did this when they first launched, so I even got the pros. Now none of my pairs ever work.
I really wish Apple would figure out how to make stuff just work. I think there's opportunity for someone to figure it out! No clue what happened to this company, but the AirPods are undoubtedly the most frustrating Apple product I've ever owned
Had 3 pairs of airpods over the years (2 original ones, 1 pro), all used heavily, haven't experienced this kind of an issue even once. And neither do I know anyone else who did. I don't know your situation, but I have a feeling you might have gotten a faulty unit, in which case a warranty request might be helpful.
I switch my current ones between a macbook and my phone multiple times a day, all it takes is pressing a single button in my taskbar on macbook or control panel of my phone.
I heard they even have an autoswitch feature now, where you can use your airpods with macbook, but when a call comes in or you play a video on your iphone, it switches automatically to that device, and then back. Haven't had a chance to test that feature myself tho, so YMMV.
> Does your solved problem bluetooth headphones RELIABLY connect to your current device
My Airpods don't. They are regularly confused whether they should connect to the iPad or the iPhone. Yes, both are nearby. But I'm only tapping and interacting on one of them at any given moment. Not always. Sometimes.
More frustrating: The iPad just loves to use its internal loudspeakers. I'm sitting on the couch watching a YouTube video via Airpods. I'm clicking on another video, sound is coming from the loudspeaker. Not always. Sometimes.
Third annoyance: I'm getting both Airpods out the capsule. Both are nearly fully charged. Only one is playing. I need to put the mute one back into the capsule, close it, open it and get the Airpod out again. Not always. Often.
Pre-COVID I used a pair of Plantronics noise cancelling headphones that covered all of your requirements pretty well. Unfortunately the microphone was shit, so I decided to get Airpod Pros for all the remote meetings. Even with the short battery life they have quickly become my default headphones.
I'm not typically a fanboy of anything, but Apple does make some quality electronics.
>Given you cannot replace battery, this is not high quality according to my standards.
Cool, just don't be surprised when the sales numbers and reviews end up not reflecting that sentiment. Mostly because I doubt that vast majority of people use that metric as a baseline measure of high quality.
Especially because airpod competitors with replaceable batteries will be singificantly heavier, significantly less waterproof and may be more costly for similar functionality.
Non replaceable batteries, non upgradeable memory etc is all a tradeoff. Checkout the mac mini with M1 and soldered on memory, but memory performance seems amazing.
I draw the line with replacable battery because it renders the device inherently useless for its purpose (mobile use case).
All Apple in ear Airpods get destroyed if anyone replaces the battery. Even Apple cannot, and they claim to care about the environment.
Beats got a bad name, so I just skip that. There's a reason they did not attach that brand name to their Airpods products.
We just had BF and I saw great deals for Airpods. All of them.
XM3, which has superb ANC, just had a successor (XM4) which has multiple device support. XM4 goes for 350. XM3 was 200 on BF.
Now compare that with Airpods Max price tag and features.
I bought XM4 as a successor to my Logitech G933. Logitech G933 has no ANC, not so good sound quality, it has a proprietary dongle (the dealbreaker for my use case due to USB-A and dongle requirement), it has microUSB, it has 3.5 mm, battery lasts 8 hours. Battery replacement can be bought directly from Logitech, easy to replace yourself, and costs 10 EUR. Compare to XM3/4 3.5 mm, Bluetooth, superb ANC, USB-C (in contrast to microUSB or lightning), and the battery is good... but I doubt it still is in 3 years.
>just had a successor (XM4) which has multiple device support.
As an owner of those same Sony headphones (XM3), their multi-device support is a joke compared to airpods. Not even kidding, night and day. Manual pairing, limit on devices, having to do everything through Sony's buggy app, etc. I still like them, because when I am working at my desk in an office, I would prefer over-the-ears. If Apple manages to match and/or beat Sony's sound+ANC quality, but bring all the connectivity and great multi-device pairing features of current Airpods to Airpods Max, I am sold.
Yeah, well, that's why I wrote XM4. XM4 is mostly like XM3. One of the very few improvements is the multiple device support (but the price difference is IMO unlikely to be worth it).
I use the WF-1000XM3 and WH-1000XM4 and the pairing of the WF-1000XM3 works fine for me, but the ANC of the over the ears XM4 (as well as your WH-1000XM3) is superior. At times, I don't even have listen to anything and it still works. Its terrific at work. Even works with getting less agitated by the noise of my children.
Genuine question, is XM4 ANC that much different from XM3? I always assumed, for some reason, that it was an incremental upgrade in sound+ANC, but more of a major upgrade in hardware dept. Never tried XM4 myself though, so that is purely from hearing people talking about it, not actually testing the device myself.
If you confirm that ANC is actually significantly better than on XM3 (which I already liked a lot anyway), then now I know what I will be upgrading to, in case Airpods Max end up not delivering on their promise :)
Reviews I read suggest only a marginal difference in ANC area. My entire argument has been in the previous posts that the XM4 isn't worth the price over the already excellent XM3. That multi-device feature of XM4? Never had to use it. I might've as well purchased a XM3. Ideally at BF (200 EUR is a steal).
Yeah, no worries, I wasn't even continuing with the argument in my previous reply, I was just curious about XM3 vs. XM4.
And on that note, for other people who are interested, XM4 had recently a really good deal on Amazon (US) for something like $250. At that price point, it is def a really good bang for the buck.
At least until Airpods Max come out, XM4 are unilaterally imo overall the best pair of wireless headphones with ANC. Not trying to imply that Airpods Max will take over that spot as soon as they get released, they might completely flop and be trash, who knows. But either way, XM4 is currently imo the best, and even if Airpods Max somehow manages to become a magical pair of headphones, XM4 is still a great pair, and is definitely still gonna be a better bang for the buck than Airpods Max (while i pre-ordered those, I don't have any illusions about me not paying the "apple tax" on those). So for anyone hesitating or not into the idea of paying $500+ for wireless headphones with ANC, i heavily recommend Sony WH-1000XM4.
> Do your "solved problem" bluetooth headphones allow EASY audio sharing when the kid is sleeping and you want to watch something with your wife? These are two bluetooth devices on same audio stream.
I don’t know, I have never once needed this capability.
> Does your solved problem bluetooth headphones RELIABLY connect to your current device (without having to unpaid with another device). That is game changing.
Yes, for the 5 years I’ve had Bluetooth headphones this has never been an issue.
> Yes, for the 5 years I’ve had Bluetooth headphones this has never been an issue.
No opinion on apple being better or not (mixed bag, in my limited experience) but this just isn't true in general I think. I've used at least a half dozen bluetooth headphones on at least a dozen different laptops/desktops/phones over the last decade... they have all had some issues with connections at various times.
Very true indeed. That's why I stopped bothering with Linux. I love Linux and I've used it on many laptops. But not a single one offered me trouble free computing. I can't blame Linux for that. It's amazing what the open source community has achieved. I hate Windows and I can't be productive on it. People who have used Apple's ecosystem know what the phrase "it just works" means. I probably wouldn't spend $899 (Australian dollars) on those headphones. But my wife recently bought a pair of Airpod pros and I've never had an experience like that with any other earphones! They just work. It feels like Apple just knows what we want! I still use a three year old iPhone 8 and it just works with latest OS updates. It hasn't slowed down a bit. Why do I need to buy a POS Android phone with 12 gb of ram when I'm happy. Apple's products actually have that zen feeling. It's hard to describe. And the longevity of their products make them really good value for money.
It looks to the PC like USB audio, but it talks to the headphones over Bluetooth.
If I want to transition from the Windows 10 laptop to the Linux laptop, or desk-side PC, I just move the dongle.
Signal is solid. Has an LED on it so you can see whether it's talking to a headset (blue), playing audio with mic umuted (green), or playing audio with mic muted (red). (Amazing feature for Zoom calls!)
The retail price of it seems a bit high at $56, but you can find them used with Jabra Evolve 65 headsets on eBay for $45-$60 as a bundle. (The headset sound is pretty good, actually. Fragile if you don't pack it flat in a backpack, alas.)
Sorry I sound like a commercial, but it really makes life easier. Seems like the frustration saved was worth the $$$.
Different people have different experiences and their opinions are based on those experiences. In my experiences Apple products don’t always “just work”, but since they’re designed with the overconfident belief that they do “just work”, the failure modes can be extremely cryptic and unrecoverable.
> Does your solved problem bluetooth headphones RELIABLY connect to your current device (without having to unpaid with another device). That is game changing.
Is that really game changing? I recently got myself a pair of Huawei FreeLace Pro which do exactly that, even have a button shortcut to change between the two devices, works with my iPhone and iPad. They have ANC, an Awareness mode, a battery charge that last 28 hours, the audio sounds amazing enough to this non-audiophile, all of that for 89€.
My "solved problem" Sony WH-1000XM3s can connect to my TV and have their volume controlled. My Apple AirPods Pro can't...
Neither pair will switch between my iPhone and MacBook without triggering a manual pair from the Bluetooth menu. To get that working for the AirPods I have to update to Big Sur but apparently that has a good chance of bricking my MacBook so I can't.
My Bose QC 35 IIs reliably connect to two devices at the same time. I spark 'em up and hear the voice say "Connected to <phone 1>... and <phone 2>". When I play anything with either phone, I hear it through the headphones. It just works.
(Yes, I save, and use, my old smartphones. I'm an Android developer so they're handy to keep around.)
If my kids are asleep we turn the TV volume down. Why would you wear headphones with your spouse, you can't have any conversation so it defeats the purpose of watching together
If you want to talk put a headphone in the outer ear, and you can still talk softly to each other. Headphones are super immersive sounding. And if you have the pros, you set them to transparency mode. You can still talk, but kids won't hear the movie.
You should consider turning down your headphone volume if the idea of talking to someone with them on seems far-fetched.
I used to be like that and my hearing shows it, and I've learned that just because I'm listening to something, it doesn't need to immerse my entire aural apparatus.
What is your point? MacDonalds make the best hamburgers because they sell so many of them? Windows is the best OS because billions of people use it?
>Do your "solved problem" bluetooth headphones allow EASY audio sharing when the kid is sleeping and you want to watch something with your wife? These are two bluetooth devices on same audio stream.
So in your mind, 'solving' a problem is buying not one, but TWO $500 headphones instead of $10 earbuds and a $5 Y connector? Oh wait, you also believe that the headphone jack is stupid. Yeah, sure, sell people a $1000 solution for a problem you created. Great job!
>It's amazing to me how many folks seem to have no clue about what folks value in the apple ecosystem.
The headphone jack that all of the other mobile manufacturers are dropping too? Putting its removal at Apple's feet alone is a bit disingenious when it was the obvious direction for smartphones. Eventually one of the manufacturers was going to be "brave" and the rest would follow.
Also, a long trailing cable from your TV / accessories across your living room to a y-connector to two more long trailing cables to two headsets is incredibly inelegant and for some houses, an impractical solution. Having wireless headphones that support a Bluetooth standard (because no two implementations are the same) that allows multiple speakers for a single source, is very nice.
If you're not familiar with Apple ecosystem, it might seem peculiar. But Apple's integration means that "just works" entails, for instance, automatic switching between devices. So I'm listening to music on my iPad, I pause it, pick up my phone and start a YouTube video. The AirPods automatically switch from the iPad to the iPhone without me doing anything. Nothing else "just works" like that, and it's one reason people like to stay within the Apple ecosystem.
I can see where you're coming from, but I expect versatility if I'm paying $500 for headphones. I want to be able to either plugin my headphones into my controller or connect to my gaming console when I'm playing. I want to connect to my TV's bluetooth when I'm watching TV. Every company does ecosystem lock to some basic level but Apple takes it to a whole new level and clearly people seem to be ok with it (and even praise them for it?)
> I want to connect to my TV's bluetooth when I'm watching TV.
I'm confused here. There's no Appke secret sauce chip in the TV so connecting my headphones (Airpods Pro) to it is the same hassle it is connecting any bluetooth device, but they work together just fine. The Apple secret sauce for switching between devices is like an escalator breaking and becoming stairs: when you use the to connect to any other bluetooth device they work as well as any dumber bluetooth headphone/speaker.
>Every company does ecosystem lock to some basic level but Apple takes it to a whole new level and clearly people seem to be ok with it (and even praise them for it?)
Wait what? How does it lock you into anything? Sure, you might not get some Apple-ecosystem-specific perks if you are using their Airpods with non-apple devices (like the automatic switching described in the parent comment), but you still get the same benefits you would expect from other non-airpods wireless headphones. You can use airpods with android phones or your tv or whatever other device supporting bluetooth headsets, just like you would with non-airpods wireless headphones. You can also plug Airpods Max into anything using a 3.5mm jack cable, just like you could with literally any other wired headphones (and many wireless over the ear ones).
I cannot think of a single feature [that is also present on non-apple wireless headphones] that Apple locks you out of if you are using airpods with a non-apple device (e.g., the automatic switching between devices based on the content played doesn't count here, because I cannot think of a single non-apple wireless headset that supports it; you get the idea).
Any product which contains an non-removable battery eventually "just dies" whether it costs $550 and is made by Apple or not.
Decades-old Bose QC 15 headphones still work because the battery is replaceable. Pop in some new ear cushions every few years from Amazon and they are like new.
Don't expect these $550 headphones to be working 10 years after purchase.
I absolutely love my AirPods Pro but it's primarily for ease of wear _(comfy)_, the lack of inner ear pressure and transparency mode.
The connectivity has been one of the worst experiences i've had lol. Both in and out of Apple ecosystem.
I think it's primarily my laptop to be honest (2018 Macbook Pro), because they do better when connected to my phone; but the ~4 other bluetooth devices including one in-ear bluetooth pair i have never have connectivity issues. Yet i can't count the number of times these AirPods have disconnected, or connected one ear but not the other, etc.
I still love my AirPods, but connectivity has been the worst out of all my bluetooth devices. It's been frustrating.
>The connectivity has been one of the worst experiences i've had lol. Both in and out of Apple ecosystem. (...) I think it's primarily my laptop to be honest (2018 Macbook Pro)
Not sure why, I have AirPods and then AirPods Pro with a late-2017 Macbook Pro and never had a problem. Ditto with 2 iPhone models...
For what it's worth, connectivity for me with the Pros has gotten much better with Big Sur. I don't think the easy switching even worked prior to this release (despite being a touted feature when announced). It's still not perfect though.
Not the person you responded to, but I have Jabra Elites as well and I've been able to switch between my Windows computer and iPhone seamlessly. In fact, the reason I bought the Jabras was because this was the exact feature I was looking for and saw many recommendations for the Elite.
Right. Lots of stuff works with non-Mac hardware. Lots of stuff doesn't work with Mac hardware. My laptop is from my job (MBP), and I have an iPhone to keep in sync with my wife. Hence my specific question.
Yeah, I have Jabra Elite 75t and it can be connected to multiple devices at same time. For me this means PC + iPhone. Works fine for taking meetings, calls, listening to music, etc.
Bose QC 35 II work exactly as you described. Yes, Previous Beats Studio bought from Apple failed to deliver such experience, hence why Apple spent some dough on custom connectivity chips, but proper headphones OEMs figure it out as well with just latest Bluetooth generation
I honestly think there are good batches and bad ones of the QC35s. I have gen 1 and they are rock solid with the connections, never fail. Have coworkers who would swear by theirs too, while others have similar complaints as you do.
FWIW, I love my Airpods Pro and it's insane that neither Sennheiser nor Bose could beat Apple to the punch with something that works as well as those do. That being said, my Airpods Pro aren't without issues: they seem to hate my iMac. Not even the Big Sur update could change my Airpods' aversion towards reliably connecting to it.
Concur—I have the QC35, I’ve given up with all the endless niggles of multiple device support and limited them to just the phone which is my use case 95% of the time.
Yeah, my connectivity story with these got so bad at one point I ended up with two pairs, each with a little sticker telling which is for my laptop and which is for my phone. Ironically, connectivity improved with FW updates...
I use the app and "flawlessly" is a joke. The app doesn't even connect to the headphones reliably, even if they're paired and I'm listening to audio through them. Maybe 10% of the time I have to force-close the app and power cycle the headphones for the app to connect.
I have the QC 35 II and now have them wired a USB mic to make multiple devices actually work seamlessly because it was so flakey with a few devices. AirPod Pros OTOH have been perfect between iPhone, iPad, work and personal MacBook and Apple TVs. Connected to one device and all the others are automatically paired and switch with no effort.
I have a few different sets of headphones ranging from cheap workout bluetooth ones to the over ear I use for work. None of them have the issues you imply.
They all happily switch from phone to laptop to other device, going in and out of range, etc
I had the AirPods and AT MX50 but wanted NC for the office, so I bought the Sony WH1000MX3 (the highest rated, $400, wireless nc headphones with the best NC) before I got the AirPods Pro. Those were praised on reviews as beating the Bose NC (which was considered king until then).
They required me to manually disconnect from one device in order to connect to another (e.g. from laptop to phone or tablet). As far as first world problems go, it was a huge pain in the arse. And nobody cared to mention it in their reviews (found out later in forums it was just not supported).
I ended up preferring the AirPods Pro (and the slightly worse nc, but much lighter and automatically connecting) over them, and now I hardly ever use them. So those were $400 down the drain.
If those AirPods Max work like I want (which, judging from the AirPods Pro, they will), that would be a solid $500 spent without the remorse and dissapointment, which is much better than my Sony purchase...
I have the XM4s, and they support multi device connections - which is how I use them. They can be paired with up to 8 devices, can be connected to 2 devices at a time, and support one active audio stream.
I also have a similar experience, I hate the unpair-pair dance and just use my AirPods even though Sony has a better sound quality and a bit better ANC.
The new version (WH1000MX4, terrible naming scheme) supposedly have multi device support but I haven't experienced it yet so not sure if it's as smooth as the AirPods.
I have the XM4s, and the multi device support does work. My only real complaint with that is it has to be initially configured in the companion app, and enabling multi device support disables certain higher quality codecs. Once configured, the app isn't necessary for multi device switching.
I bought and sold my MX3s having had this exact experience, and have been waiting for Apple to release over ears so that I could have the same seamless experience I have with my AirPods Pro.
The number of times I’ve had to pull my laptop out of the overhead compartment on a flight to turn off Bluetooth so I could pair them with my iPad meant I eventually gave up using them. As you say, definitely a first world problem, but I guess that just means I’m in the target demographic.
My jabras work seamlessly between my phone and laptop (and that's basically all that I need). It's weird to not have multiple device connectivity with wireless headphones these days.
The question for me is, why do the Apple iphone, computers, appleTV etc. not support the "just works" experience on non-Apple headphones? Bluetooth is supposed to be a standard, no?
While I like the ergonomics, I'm wondering how much of the lack of it in non-apple headphones products is the result of Apple not fully supporting them and thus, monopolistic practices.
Replacing the cable with (modified?) bluetooth technology allows distinguishing "our hardware" from "their hardware" and adjusting software to only support certain features.
So, why would not apple devices only support these features on Apple headphones?
Bluetooth is a garbage standard riddled with decades of legacy support. Apple achieves the "just works" functionality with a proprietary chip and a proprietary protocol. Bluetooth still can't support simultaneous high-quality voice and audio.
Actually multi-point Bluetooth devices work just like that. They remain connected to 2 or more devices on the A2DP profile and switch to the source that's currently playing.
I get exactly this sort of functionality with my two (non-Apple) bluetooth headphones - the Jabra Elite 85T & the Sony XM4s. The Sony's can be paired with up to 8 devices, support two simultaneous device connections, and one active audio stream at a time. The experience is the same with the Jabras. I listen to podcasts on my iPhone, pause, and can seamlessly switch to Netflix on the iPad. It "just works".
Different use cases, mostly. The XM4s are over ear and have much better sound, but they're overkill for work (my workplace is fairly quiet, at least these days). The Jabras are a better fit for that. The XM4s were a bit of an impulse buy when I needed good ANC for my frequent Zoom calls while sharing an apartment with noisy family.
The Jabras are earbuds. The XM4 is a pair of over ear headphones.
I'm not the parent but I typically use a cheap set of earbuds for exercise/active commuting and my over ear headphones while in the office or at home due to better comfort/noise cancellation/audio quality.
I get this use case, but I'm always suspicious how useful the workflow such "integration" supports may be. I have a feeling a lot of folks who flit between multiple devices are staying occupied to avoid doing difficult or onerous work.
In other words, the real "productivity" hack is to not support a dilute workflow. One will save a _lot_ more time that way compared to some device interoperability.
I have a feeling a lot of folks who flit between multiple devices are staying occupied to avoid doing difficult or onerous work.
That's an interesting connection you've drawn between switching audio sources and malingering work.
On the flip side, a mere anecdote of where this kind of flipping was actually beneficial, if you will?
It came in the form of being on a zoom call on the Macbook (which I have in a dock and connected to a pair of displays) with a single airpod in, hearing the kid having a kid moment, and being able to just reach over, open up my ipad, join the call and immediately have audio switched so I could walk down stairs to help buckaroo with a chore, walk back upstairs, put the ipad away and switch back to the Macbook was kind of...well awesome.
No one on the call had a clue.
(also comes in handy when I want to switch from work macbook to personal macbook after hours, or vice versa, if I'm on personal macbook after hours and get paged and need to jump on a slack call. Definitely not avoiding onerous or difficult work there either)
What a weird reflex. Inventing arbitrary character flaws because someone wants to do something as harmless as be able to switch audio sources seamlessly, and then being so uncreative that the only reason you can come up with is to procrastinate work.
Someone people truly can't handle gadget chit-chat.
> This has been a solved problem for like a decade.
Tell that to Bose. Their newest 700 model headphones are a UX/Connectivity nightmare.
If not for the fact that the Sony noise cancelling headphones exist in the same price bracket, I could easily see myself going with a $500 pair of headphones that "just work".
Actually, as a both an Apple user and high-fidelity music lover, I'd happily pay $549, if and only if they sound comparable to the peers at this price point.
If their fidelity is below its peers, all of the "just works" stuff goes to trash for me. I have a pair of entry level Philips BT headphones (designed by Gibson) and they sound well above its price point. It's no Sennheiser, Grado, RHA or similar but, they're not a pair of cheap cans either.
So, for $549, they should rather sound detailed and balanced. Otherwise, It's meaningless for me.
In my view, having things "just work" is elusive and unpredictable. I've seen this in the workplace. You can have two workers with similar jobs, similar or even the same hardware and software tools. One person will constantly be cursing at their machine, running into indescribable hang-ups, and so forth. The other will just be cruising right along.
You're tempted to suspect that the problems experienced by your one colleague are self inflicted, but you'd never suggest it out loud. The differences might be real, but due to a hidden cause. Or, some workers might be more "accident prone" when it comes to dealing with tech. I've even seen this with people who should be the most tech savvy: Good programmers.
Regardless of the cause, imagine that someone discovers a market appeal to the effect of: "The problems are not your fault, we have stuff that just works." It's a safe bet that the message will resonate with X percent of people. That's a perfect market. And if Apple has discovered that market, we certainly can't dispute that they're successful -- possibly the most successful company on the planet.
On the other hand, if you belong to the other group, and somebody can make a less expensive product that you're satisfied with, and it "just works" for you, then you're happy too. They can be successful too, even if on a modest scale. I'd take 10% of Apple's market. ;-)
At one workplace, long ago, two of us were using Windows, and my colleague couldn't make it work at all, plus he sent me articles about Windows horror stories from magazines. I never had a problem. My friend ended up with Apple, and I kept using Windows. We were both happy.
I've bought at least 5 bluetooth headphones, ranging from cheap workout ones to Bose QuietComfort. None of them work well with multiple devices. Inevitably I have to disconnect my laptop because it's preventing my phone from playing audio. AirPods are the only one that works. I can have 3, 4 devices connected to my AirPods and it'll just work.
> This has been a solved problem for like a decade.
Yeah right. I spend hundreds of dollars in headphones when I want to upgrade and it's always the same crappy bluetooth experience. Not saying this will be better but that problem hasn't been solved yet.
Yeah and AirPods Pro are far from perfect. I can pair them with my TV but they don't support volume control over Bluetooth so I can't change their volume, they don't have an interface for it on the device.
Meanwhile my Sony WH1000-XM3s work perfectly with my TV, including volume control, and work perfectly with everything else including my Apple devices.
I don't have "connectivity issues" and battery life is 10hrs more than AirPods Max. They even included a stereo cable in the box to connect to the standard 3.5mm jack built-in to the headset, and they also came with a proper case to protect them when they're in my rucksack. All for £330 less than AirPods Max.
It's amazing that people think AirPods Max will be the first ever good set of on-ear wireless headphones.
I bought AIAIAI headphones decades ago, they work with all tech I use: I just plug them in, and they just work. No need to pair them with bluetooth, no nothing.
Since they are modular, they also have been a breeze to upgrade and repair. Need different cables? Better microphone? Its 20$ to upgrade that part of the headphone. Want to add bluetooth support? Can do that as well.
People buying and gifting pair of > 200$ headphones every year as if speakers are some kind of tech that gets outdated.
If you really care about audio quality and the environment, just buy a good pair of upgradeable headphones. They'll last you your whole life.
I don't think that's true for wireless. I have a pair of bose qc 35s, but can't actually use them to watch general video content on my computer because of the 1/3rd second latency. If I can watch something on a player that lets me add video delay(like VLC), they work great, but not for youtube or web videos.
Definitely not a solved problem. My bose qc35 II headphones constantly drop connection or connects to my ipad instead of my laptop. The sound quality is trash but I'm ok with that as I got them for active noise cancellation. ANC works great I must admit.
For what it is worth, I have the Sennheiser Momentum Bluetooth headset.
I am an audio weirdo who used a lot of professional headphones over the years, and I like the Sennheiser sound. Too often have I been disappointed by "premium brands" that are not really in the business of designing headphone drivers and so their sound is subpar.
These Sennheiser headphones switch sources automatically, they are made from metal and leather, they sound great, they have all the battery I need and, most importantly for me, they have actual buttons. After using other headphones without buttons, I can't tell you how much better I like that "feature".
I think Apple can make headway with noise cancellation, battery and ergonomics. That will be enough for most people.
However, for myself, I am most curious if they will actually sound good, especially given that their marketing quip on that topic is - well let's call it "more than a few empty phrases".
Why would you say something like that when these Apple headphones are not at all aimed at people that want headphones that do the bare minimum job and nothing else? Comparing your $100 Sennheisers to these misses the point completely.
Top comment was talking about how it's nice to have headphones that "just work" as headphones are expected to. The response that $100 Sennheisers do the same thing is perfectly reasonable. Lest you miss the point completely: This is speaking to the audience who only want the "just works" headphones and not the $400 worth of differentiating features.
No, the top comment was talking specifically about the problems that Apple has addressed with their headphones through hardware and software. It's not analogous at all.
The point is that "their job" differs for some people and OP was pretty explicit on what "their job" meant to them.
And the point is that most of the things perceived as only working on Apple are actually standard nowadays. You can automatically switch devices, you can automatically transform multi-channel audio to spatial audio on headphones, and so on.
Name one device that switches automatically between devices as seamlessly as Airpods?
I have Macs and PCs and the only device that I can use wirelessly without any issues are my Airpods. With the PC, it's just a click to connect. I have tried Jabra headsets, Sony, Bose, and others and none of them even come close so I have to politely disagree with that statement. If these Airpods Max are anything like my regular Airpods, that will be worth it just to add watching TV to that list.
I have Jabra Elites and I don't even have to "click to connect". They're connected to both devices at the same time. They're what I use every day for listening to music on one device and seamlessly switch to answering a call on another device, no press of any button required.
I actually have AirPods too, and I consider the Jabras to be more seamless.
I have a Jabra Elite headset which is what I figured you were referring to and I think you're stretching it to say that it's seamless. I can't get it to connect to my computer and phone without having the app installed and, even then, the sound quality was garbage until I updated the firmware on the set. I don't see how you can think that the Jabra is more seamless unless you only use 2 devices and don't use the Airpods with iCloud. My Airpods switch from my phone, computer, iPad, and Apple TV so seamlessly that I "donated" my the Elite to my wife for work. She has to answer phones for her job and even she thinks the audio quality on the Elite is bad compared to her Airpods but she finds the headset more comfortable than the Airpods.
I have the Jabra Elite 65t and I've never installed the app on any device. As I type this I currently have it connected to both my iPhone and my Macbook Pro and it is definitely more seamless than my AirPods when switching between the two. The AirPods require me to manually switch which device it is connected to when I switch between music and a call (it's only one single button press, so not that big of a deal, but still). The Jabra, OTOH, requires literally zero interaction for me. I listen to music on my phone and then when it's time for a Zoom call on my laptop I simply launch Zoom and the Jabra automatically switch. I also use it with my iPad, an Android tablet, and two other macbooks and it works fine. The only quirkiness is that it doesn't like being connected to a macbook and an ipad at the same time. When switching between the iPad and one of my MBPs I have to manually disconnect from the iPad first, but that's only with the iPad for some reason.
I've never noticed a difference in the sound quality, and I have actually had coworkers remark that they can hear me better when I use the Jabras, FWIW.
I love how everyone is making the same point while, I think intentionally, ignoring the major issue... Jabra's can do the switching with 2 bluetooth devices. Airpods can do it between every Apple device, without doing anything. The situation you're describing where you use the Jabra headsets/phones with an iPad, tablet, and other Macbooks requires you to connect to the devices manually. It's not always a pain but it's not seamless like with Airpods. If you have to manually switch anything then you either don't have them set up correctly or you intentionally turned something off. I don't have to do anything to get my Airpods to switch devices.
>Jabra's can do the switching with 2 bluetooth devices. Airpods can do it between every Apple device, without doing anything.
I dunno, it seems like you're the one ignoring what people are saying. Multiple people in this thread are specifically pointing out that Jabra can easily do this automated switching too, with no issues. I don't know why you keep ignoring that.
>The situation you're describing where you use the Jabra headsets/phones with an iPad, tablet, and other Macbooks requires you to connect to the devices manually.
No, that's not what I said. The Jabras automatically switch between all of my devices (with the sole exception of the iPad for an unknown reason). It does not require any manual acts on my part.
>If you have to manually switch anything then you either don't have them set up correctly or you intentionally turned something off.
Yes, I intentionally turned off the Automatic switching feature of the Airpods because if I left it on, the Airpods would decide to randomly switch devices even when I was in the middle of a phone call, in the middle of a song, or randomly switch to a device that was sitting in another room completely unused. The Automatic switching feature on the Airpods is completely unusable to me, and after talking to other Airpods users, they found the same. The Jabras, on the other hand, don't have any such issues, and thus the Jabras are much more seamless.
Then I'm befuddled on how our experiences, and apparently those we've talked to, can be so different. Especially considering that Jabra's official support had confirmed to me that you can only be actively paired to 2 devices at a time with the Elite headsets (https://www.reddit.com/r/Jabra/comments/g32aom/elite_75t_act...). Either that has changed since I first purchased the Elite or you're stretching the truth. On top of that, the Airpods automatic switching can't connect to devices that are in sleep mode so I feel like you're stretching the truth with that too.
I don't really care if you believe me. There are other people in this very thread talking about Airpods terrible automatic switching behavior, and many people talking about the exact same seamless automatich switching that the Jabra provide. But you can keep sticking your head in the sand and ignoring it if you want. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'm not ignoring it. Why would a Jabra representative lie to me and say that it only supports 2 active connections instead of lying to me to say that it supports as many as I want? It's far more likely that they were telling me the truth about their product and that you're misrepresenting your experience than it is that they were lying to make their product seem worse while you're telling the truth.
I don’t know about “as seamlessly” but my jabra’s connect to both PC and iPhone at same time, so no switching or clicking required. At time I bought the Jabras this seemed like an advantage over the AirPods. Still happy with them.
I feel like this is a pretty standard feature of most earbuds but I don't think there are many headphones/cans that do that. I agree that it's a neat feature and wish more things did that (while also giving the option to disable it).
For me, the ability to switch between audio on all my devices instantly. Listening on my mac, answer a call on my iPhone automatically. I realize this is a niche use case, but would be really nice for me.
The ability to just take them off and have them pause is icing on the cake as well.
If other headphones have these features, I'm open to them.
My Jabra elites do both those things (multiple devices with instant switch on calls & auto pause with on-ear detection), and are much cheaper. The only thing they don't have is the adaptive EQ but the jury's still out on how much of that is just a marketing gimmick.
I have a Jabra elite headphones and you're either overselling it by a lot or only switch between 2 devices. They're garbage compared to my Airpods and their app is absolutely terrible. It wouldn't even let me connect to Zoom without upgrading the firmware on them which failed every time. Without the upgrade, it sounded like a crappy phone call whenever I'd get a Zoom call. After the upgrade, it sounds like a slightly less crappy phone call.
No I'm not, your experience is not universal. I use them consistently between my phone and laptop without issue. I've never really needed to connect headphones to more than 2 devices.
If you're using a macbook you need to ensure you're using the AAC codec, for some reason macOS makes SBC as the default codec for lots of devices and you've to force it to
use the non-garbage codec.
How can you say "No, I'm not" when I've explicitly made the point that the Jabra headset can only have 2 active connections. Just because you've never needed to connect more than 2 devices doesn't mean that this isn't an important distinction for me or others. I literally said "you're either overselling this or only using 2 devices".
Yeah, that's my issue. I have a pair of Anker in-ears (Liberty Pro 2) for working out and they're great for that. When it comes to being at my desk during work, seamless switching is what I need.
I can’t help but think you’re subtracting points for needing to upgrade firmware (not sure I would) and the negative experience you had doing so. Also when you say “headset” I think we may be comparing different models.
I’ve never had a firmware upgrade fail on my set of Jabra Elite 75t’s yet, and I think I’ve done three, maybe four since I got them.
I’ve never had to use or been tempted to use an app for them on the PC, only using the one on my iPhone. They work great, sound quality seems fine but not fantastic - maybe AirPods are better, but I wouldn’t know. One nice thing is the EQ in the Jabra app - it’s not “adaptive” like AirPods, but I consider manual EQ a better feature if it’s an either/or decision. Have presets for music and meetings that I rarely mess with unless on long meeting or longer music listening session. I can see how the adaptive would save you from even thinking about it so I can see why some people would prefer it.
The one thing I find annoying about the Jabra set is that if I take the left ear out to talk to someone, I may have to put both back in case and out again to get them both back online. I hear about similar problems with AirPods though.
I definitely am. The headphones didn't work out of the box on several devices, even just via Bluetooth. It sounded like an old-timey telephone. And that's exactly where I think Apple has the advantage. My overall experience with Airpods was so much better and continues to be better and more seamless. The Jabra headphones are fine but I don't even think they're worth what I paid for them and that wasn't as much as the new Airpods headphones.
Again check the codec mac is using for this. I've had no issues with them, you either had a defective device or Mac is forcing the SBC codec. On windows there's a headset audio device for every bluetooth device that sounds garbage too (regardless of what the device actually is).
There's no way to set the codec on the Mac unless the individual software has an option for it. Considering that no other devices have this issue and it was improved with a firmware update, I'm going to say it wasn't an issue with the Mac at all.
Good to know! However, I already have a pair of wireless earbuds for working out. I'm in the market for a pair of over-ear headphones with these feature.
If the tech exists for in-ears though, hopefully it will/does exist in over-ear.
Not sure why you are being downvoted. This is obviously a real dynamic. Expensive tech gear is somewhat like an entry level luxury vehicle for the masses. You’re not seriously rich enough for a S-Class Benz, but you could live that aspiration via older model CLA.
So yeah, not quite rich enough to buy a house in major cities, but hey, you can certainly splurge on this kind of stuff.
Of course you don't need to spend $500 to buy headphones that do their job. There are plenty of great headphones to buy. For me, I have some beats flex which are great for small portable phones which also are well integrated with the Apple devices. Before them, I had some nice Sennheiser wired phones.
The promise of the Airpods Max is to be very high quality headphones, which are in that rough price range. On top of that the complete integration into the Apple universe and some nice functions like the spacial audio, which had been well received with the AirPods Pro. Which are much cheaper, if you are not aiming for the highest audio quality.
Honestly, the Anker Soundcore Q10s are great. I have two pairs of studio monitor headphones on my desk (Sony MDR-V6 and BeyerDynamic DT770s) and I'm usually too lazy to put them on because the Q10s are good enough for anything but detailed audio work. They're $40, and often on sale for $30. I returned a pair of $230 Sony WH-1000XM3s because Sony has jumped the shark in the bass wars and you couldn't get them to sound reasonable without EQing the source. The $30 Q10s literally sound better.
I have a pair of the HD 4.50 BT, and they sound like the same one parent is describing. Cost around $100 on sale, battery lasts for days and I wear them 8 hrs a day for work and several hours after work listening to music or streaming video. Sound quality and active noise cancelling are both quite good for the price point. Only complaint I have is the built in microphone sounds terrible, and they always try to connect to my laptops as a headset.
Even $25 Sound Blaster JAMs tick all the boxes here. Battery lasts for days, ultra-reliable Bluetooth connection. The battery even stays at maximum capacity for years and the only thing that needs changing is the foam pads. I’ve gifted many of these to family over the years and they are all still working.
I have a pair of Sennheiser Momentum 3 (the cans not the buds) and every fucking time I use them, the audio gets stolen by some device making a notification sound, and then does not go back to the call/video/whatever I'm actually trying to listen to. I'd not call that just fine.
Can you say what model you've got? I haven't yet bought Bluetooth buds but when my tatty current wired ones die I probably will. I'd been thinking about Jabra's but I'll take whatever is cheap and works ;)
Having paid $350 for Bose QC3 headphones 4 years ago, that I use every day but sometimes have to fight with when e.g. my MacBook Pro keeps trying to steal focus even though i shut it and am trying to use the headphones with my phone now, etc. I completely agree. Paying a bit more for something that just works as well as my airpods do, assuming that this delivers, is totally worth it.
On top of that, I expect the sound quality will be a big step up, and the spatial audio might be really cool.
I see you’ve never used AirPods between multiple devises. It’s become a lot better in the last year, but that’s only because it started out infuriating.
QC3s were much better than AirPods at multi device up until a recent update.
> I see you’ve never used AirPods between multiple devises. It’s become a lot better in the last year, but that’s only because it started out infuriating.
Not the OP, but I've used AirPods since day one, switching between my iPad, iPhone, and Mac and they've been fine. I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. It's one of the things I loved about them from go, in fact a lot of people loved the way they switched between devices from the start. It was one of their most praised features.
I had the same experience with iPad and iPhone and with my MacBook... sometimes. Mohave, at least on my machine, had buggy networking stacks, and sometimes the bluetooth would just stubbornly refuse to work, WiFi as well, and it would take a reboot to fix it.
Happened every week or two, and I've never seen this problem with Catalina, or in fact any previous OSX.
And I still get the thing where a device only picks up one AirPod and I have to stick them both back in the case to get stereo.
Dramatically better than any bluetooth speaker I've had? Of course. But not perfect.
> Dramatically better than any bluetooth speaker I've had? Of course. But not perfect.
I agree, save I wouldn't describe it as dramatically better. My experience with bluetooth headphones switching between multiple devices prior to the AirPods was pretty much unusable. So the AirPods delivering "Not Perfect" was by comparison night and day.
Bose requires using their mobile app that is always very slow to open and sync and full of useless bloated features, and for whatever reason they've decided nobody should ever have more than 2 devices as a firm rule. So you want to use them with a work computer, home computer, and phone? Gotta spend 20 seconds opening the shitty app all the time and fiddling with which two are the currently connected devices.
And then on top of that, even when exactly 2 devices are connected they frequently steal focus from each other (which may be MacOS behaving badly rather than the fault of Bose, but the end result is that I'm often connected to the wrong thing and my sound isn't working).
I use my Bose QC35 II almost everyday and they store at least 5-7 different connections on the device. I have my phone, two PCs, Apple TV, iPad and MacBook Pro saved. You can slide and release the power button from the middle position to the forward position to jump to the next connection. Just stop on the one you want to connect to.
Like you mention it's hit or miss with the host device though. Sometimes it fails to connect and you need to connect from within the OS.
Its wild to see such different experiences. I have QC35s and they've never paired correctly with my iPhone. Part of that, I suspect, is because you have to use the stupid Bose app to pair your BT headphones. Why Bose doesn't let you pair them using the standard system is beyond me.
In the end I only use the QC35s on my laptop which is a total disappointment.
> Why Bose doesn't let you pair them using the standard system is beyond me.
The app collects data on what music you listen to and sends it back to Bose. So obviously they want to encourage you to install and use the app.
Last I checked, at least. Also, there are _two_ Bose apps now, and which one you use depends on which Bose QuietComfort headphones you have. That I have no explanation for.
It does! You can turn it off but by default it sends usage data back to Bose. To disable this go there hidden the setting under the profile icon in the top left then Privacy Policy.
I don't use my QC700s because I had so many pairing issues. I'm using Steelseries ones with a boom (great quality but I look like a helicopter pilot on zoom).
My QC35s disconnects every 10 minutes on Windows desktops or Apple Macbooks. It's better wired but even wired I can hear it cut out for a bit sometimes.
Not sure if it's my ignorance, but doing the bluetooth dance is infuriating, even with AirPods.
5% of the time, I get correct pairing when powered on. 20% of the time, going to the Bluetooth menu -> Device -> Connect works. The rest of the time is a frustrating time having to remove/go into paring mode/re-pair to get it to work (AirPods included).
My AirPod experience has gotten much worse since they added the auto switching feature. It just keeps jumping between my phone, iPad and MacBook. Ended up just disabling it.
Interesting. I wonder what goes wrong for you. I’m always astonished that mine gets it right. I have the occasional mishap but it’s quickly and easily corrected.
We have some google nest speakers and wow, they get it wrong so often despite being stationary. They can connect to one person, not another, drop connections, vanish for days until I care to reset them and get them back online. Sometimes the voice changes, haha. Airpods though, I can share them with my family and they work great between each of our devices.
It’s one of those things where I consider myself lucky. As a software developer I don’t subscribe to the “no adults in the room” attitude, but I know this stuff is hard. I’d expect more people to have problems.
Hah, whats funny is my google speakers work 100% of the time.
The switching itself technically works. The problem is it needs to be smarter to not switch away when audio is currently in use - especially if the mic is in use.
One issue I've seen a few times is if I have something playing on my mac, and a video going on my iPad, they've gotten into a switch loop.
Same. I found out the hard way that if your mom butt calls you phone they'll switch over even if you're in the middle of a Zoom meeting on the Mac. Using your phone while watching Netflix on the computer also became a minefield.
I am on BigSur and iOS 14. While watching a video, AirPods switch from Mac to iPhone when I get a call, but won't switch back after I disconnect the call. I have to manually do the switch back. So this is still not an optimal experience.
I forget how this is on my Bose. I think video keeps playing with muted volume when you take the phone call so when you disconnect you just rejoin the video.
You don't get the magic. You can still connect to them.
If your case is personal iPhone + work MacBook, it's probably easier to just use wired EarPods with the work MacBook. You'll get better microphone quality for meetings too.
I find switching between a work MacBook (different Apple ID) and a personal iPhone and MacBook Air to work just fine. You have to use the Bluetooth Menu, but I haven’t seen any issues.
I have the same use case, and you don't need to visit the Bluetooth menu. On OSX, you can use the volume icon and select the AirPods as output device to switch. On iOS, you can use the AirPlay quickmenu icon to select the AirPods and switch to them.
I think this is much faster than going to either OSs bluetooth settings menu.
> Paying a bit more for something that just works ...
You hit a nerve with me on this one. I have heard this line all too often to encourage people spend more money. In this case it is not “a bit more”. But a whole lot more.
Pricing needs to be brought to levels of sanity. The reason we are seeing ridiculous prices like these is because millennials don’t pay attention to prices or there is way too much credit in the market or because the gap between rich and poor is getting larger and larger.
I understand the whole paying more for something that works better. I do. But this argument is often used by those who are terribly inexperienced at life, like a copy and paste of a rich experienced person’s take, only they don’t have money like the experienced person does.
Exactly. You can get Sony XM4s for $279 right now. The Airpods Max are nearly double. And yes, that's the sale price; however, Apple products rarely go more than 10% off. Ever. So we can use $500 as a fair comparison, and it's still double after paying proportional taxes.
You describe me well: I don't use mine every day, but I use them often, and in particular for work calls. If the microphone is great, and the call audio quality too, I'll probably get a pair at some point.
Sure, if by "works" you mean "only works with other Apple products." The cost isn't just $500, it's also the opportunity cost of going with any other competing (and possibly better) product in the future. Apple's pricing is high, but is even higher if you account for the hidden hand of future buying power you give them. It's a brilliant business strategy as it limits your choice as a consumer for the lifetime of the headphones.
Say Apple decides to slow down your old iPhone again (what? no! [1])... Or maybe you just like the new Google Pixel. Sucks to be you, time to buy a new iPhone again ($$$) if you don't want your headphones to stop "just working."
The iPhone 'slow down' was to keep the phone operating with old batteries. Without the throttling the phone would just shut down abruptly under certain conditions.
Part of the reason Apple has this issue at all is that they provide continued support for their hardware years after others have stopped even giving security updates.
Apple has also a multi-year lead on things like chip performance in their devices (and more subjectively hardware design, software performance too).
I used Android nexus phones for a few years before jumping into the Apple ecosystem with the iPhone 5 (I had used macs for a while prior to that since OS X 10.3 and played with a variety of linux distos alongside it).
If Apple stuff starts to degrade compared to competition it will be a hassle to jump to a different ecosystem. As it happens, over the years it's just gotten better further ahead of the competition (with some mistakes: butterfly keyboard, touchbar).
The premium and their authoritarian approach to vertical integration and good defaults isn't for everyone, but I think it's really great and worth the premium. Other companies seem to be all over the place without much of a unified vision of what they're doing. Google in particular is extremely bad at this.
It's always shocking how Apple folks adopt a reality distortion field when it comes to explaining their reasoning. Whether it's avoiding justifying the things they claim they get from Apple ("seamless device interop") or ignoring the way Apple actively treats their customers like hot garbage (see Louis Rossman's youtube channel, or the asinine arguments companies like Apple lead against right to repair and all the poor board layout and non-interchangeable parts), instead of saying a reasonable answer like "I'm willing to be ripped off because I like the shiny buttons" or "I have one specific app I use on MacOS that I haven't had the time to replicate elsewhere", it's always some kind of indignation.
If someone tells me my bargan-tier Samsung phone is slower than molasses, I'm not gonna say "yeah but I like the blue color". I'm gonna agree.
I'm a long time Apple customer and have not noticed I was being treated like hot garbage. Their products have performed as promised with little to no hassle.
Can't say the same for their competitors (MS, Linux, Samsung, etc), whose products I've used extensively over the past 25 years. I am not a computing novice. Call it a reality distortion field if you want but I am happy.
It's quite reasonable to dislike the self-repair situation and the opaque software issue reporting. Some people value those a lot, and others less so.
I don't think Apple treats their customers like garbage though; quite the opposite. I've always had a no-bullshit customer experience - fast and easy returns & replacements, generous policies & even being able to return outside the window, no haggling about issues. E.g. a few months ago my iPad stopped charging, a replacement arrived 2 days later. Most tech companies are absolutely terrible at customer service like this.
Tech isn't perfect and will break. And by buying Apple you DO have to go through Apple when this happens, but the actual customer experience is top notch. To characterize it as being about shiny buttons is ridiculous, it's about buying peace of mind and having one less thing in your life be bullshit.
I agree, the customer support rep was very nice when he told me I had to buy a new Mac mini when my hard drive failed after 5 years. They even offered to recycle the old one if I paid $50! How nice!
Do you foresee that situation going any differently if you had experienced the same issue with a Surface Book or a Samsung laptop 5 years after you bought it? Because I don't.
If it was under 7 years old (the typical cutoff for vintage products) they should have offered the option to fix it at the Apple Store.
Could be you got stuck in an edge case or had a bad rep, which sucks. Nevertheless, they have the highest NPS / customer satisfaction scores in the industry, if we're to go by the data.
Sometimes I'm even convinced that Apple is absolutely right in squeezing their captive users of every damn penny (or grand) they can squeeze. They should charge even more. (The customer is always right, especially the addicted one).
Many flagship Android phones followed Apple's lead and killed the headphone jack, so there's a lot of old headphones that no longer "just work".
Furthermore, Bluetooth sucks all around. It's 2020 and you still can't transmit voice without falling back to SCO and having everything sound like a tin can. SBC is barely passable for music, and has hundreds of ms of latency. So companies have already hacked their own various proprietary codecs. Ever hear of AptX or LDAC? They only work with Qualcomm and Sony licensing/devices. Imagine spending $400 on your new WH-1000XM4s only to find that LDAC doesn't work on any desktop OS.
I already don't need a new phone, but the further lack of a headphone jack dis-incentivizes me from considering further. If the choices are accepting headphones I need to charge to use and being a stick in the mud, I'm going to do the latter. I'll keep my old iPhone until it no longer functions. Consequently, Apple is getting less lifetime revenue from me. But I'm not Apple's target consumer: there are others who are far more profitable. An iPhone and a MacBook are all I need, I don't pay for any of their subscription services (Apple Music) etc.
> Sure, if by "works" you mean "only works with other Apple products."
Case in point: my mom wants to buy AirPods, but she uses a Samsung Galaxy S10. I told her it'll work fine because Bluetooth, but that (at least originally) AirPods ship out with buggy firmware that needs updating. She'd need to find a friend with an iPhone just to update them to some current version before use. (And apparently even that is a UX nightmare with no real update button or indication)
> Sure, if by "works" you mean "only works with other Apple products."
Well, yeah, that is what people mean when they say this. I'm not seeing anyone here make the case that it's worthwhile if you're don't use other Apple products, or that it's not a giant hassle to switch out of Apple products. They just don't care as much about lock in as you.
> They just don't care as much about lock in as you.
I'm sure some Apple customers realize what's happening. As in, they knowingly look at the slowly boiling pot of water and get in because it's not hot enough to burn them yet.
But I think for the most part, Apple is exploiting a common blind spot in human psychology, the ability to predict the future. People look at the Apple devices they have now and make a decision to buy Airpods. They don't see the future implications of being locked-in.
The typical Apple consumer probably starts with an iPhone or mac (because of phone plans, open standards, apps, etc). The real lock-in begins with the AirPods, iWatch, etc. Once they get you to buy one of these 'lock in' devices, they're much more likely to continue making more money off of you the next time you need a new laptop/phone/desktop. That's all well and fine if you know this going in, but I'd wager most don't.
This is only fair if the Apple user is worried about switching away from iOS, not other devices.
For example, an iPhone user can get the exact same experience from the Galaxy Buds as I have with my S10+, but they get the added bonus of having enhanced operability with things like AirPods, if that's what they want instead. I think the only limitation with the Buds is the ability to stream to 2 sets of Buds at once, but that's such a rare use-case and doesn't really affect the experience in the same way as the quick switching between Apple device that comes with AirPods.
I wish I could have the Apple experience, but my hate for iOS is too strong. Otherwise, I love a lot of what they develop.
When you price out the TCO of staying in the Apple ecosystem... It's quite a bit more in yearly spend than other companies. Feels simply not worth it even with moderate earning power. Maybe I'd do it if I was making some of the wages I see around here :).
The old airpods work about as well as most bluetooth headphones on Android. The only part you lack is an official app to configure stuff like tap actions and updates.
This is spot on. Every now and then only one of my AirPods will connect and then it’s just putting them back in the case over and over until they start working again.
I have this issue from time to time. But I discovered that changing the volume slightly solves it. It seems the problem is not that one AirPod is not connected, but that for some reason the volume is turned all the way down on.
I setup a macro with BetterTouchTool on my Mac to turn on bluetooth and connect to my Airpods. And that has essentially solved any of the edgecase weirdness about connectivity. Now it's truly magical 100% of the time. I can be listening to a podcast on my phone, hit the macro and jump into a zoom call with no menu or case futzing.
Before this I was dealing with these bizarro issues occasionally that was really frustrating.
My experience with the AirPods Pro is far from being smooth. Random disconnections, sometimes L or R do not connect, cannot use microphone and listen to music...
Tired of them. Bought a pair of Beyerdynamic with a 3,5mm jack and not even a single issue... For about 150$...
Yeah, I have no idea where people are getting the whole seamless wireless connectivity experience idea from. AirPods are pretty much awful in terms of connecting. It’s a little better than regular Bluetooth because of the case which gives a lot of visual feedback when you open it, but that’s mostly to trick your senses into not realizing it’s still just a shitty bluetooth headphone that takes forever to connect.
Being limited to Bluetooth range isn't great if you're using them with any device other than the phone in your pocket. While the Airpods seem better than some other Bluetooth devices, you can't walk far around your home/office before they start cutting out
Because in the past most Bluetooth headphones were terrible and pretty much everyone got in pairing hell at some point. Airpods were much better than the status quo when launched.
That's simply not true. They might have been better than cheap bluetooth headphones with which they didn't compete, but there were plenty of price-competitive bluetooth headphones at the time which were as good or better.
The only new things about airpods were the truly wireless nature (which was definitely an advantage) and the Apple logo*.
My (Apple) Powerbeats Pro work about 50% of the time. A really bad design flaw with the tiny contacts means that 1 of the pair frequently doesn't charge in the case after a few minutes.
Go to use them for a run and one is often flat. Or my phone will try and connect to the non-charging one in the case, leaving me with no sound when I'm not actually using ear phones.
Some Apple stuff is great - but 'it just works' is a myth.
Thanks for pointing out the spatial audio. It amazes me all the comments about price but not discussing what features these actually have. Dynamic head tracking for spatial audio could be really amazing and is not cheap to implement. These aren't just some "dumb" headphones with speakers in them. I'm really interested in trying these out on the Xbox X which has Dolby Atmos on a big screen and hearing the sounds move as you look around. Also, imagine silent discos with the DJ streaming in Atmos as you move around. Now if only there was a widely adopted open spatial audio standard instead of Atmos...
Dynamic head tracking spacial audio is available today with the Airpods Pro and it is amazing. Watching surround-sound TV with spacial audio enabled is basically indistinguishable from watching TV with a surround sound system and no headphones, to the point where I have to check to make sure the audio is playing through my headphones and not external speakers.
Downside is that it only works with iPhone, iPad and AppleTV 4k. It's such an amazing upgrade over my current setup, though, that I'm planning on upgrading to an AppleTV 4K so that I'm not limited to using spatial audio on just my iPad.
I believe you only get special audio with paired to an iOS device which also includes an accelerometer. So basically iPad and iPhone. Any third-party devices don’t get special audio, as far as I’m aware.
I will tell you this, I do not miss headphone cords at all. Not one bit. I don't miss the cord snagging on parts of my desk, or my legs, or the arms of my office chair, or under the casters, etc.
Not to mention cord noise on IEMs, which admittedly isn't really a problem on over-the-ear headphones anyway.
I'll probably never buy another pair of corded headphones.
I use a pair every day. And I use bluetooth headphones every day. The existence of either doesn't make the other useless.
And I have used bluetooth headphones for over a decade, I find it hilarious that when apple suddenly had a offering that it suddenly became obsolete with cords.
It is impossible to overstate how much bluetooth sucks for temporary connections. I dare you, pair your device in my car. Or to play that song on a shared speaker setup. Just a quickie, see how well you do. Might work, might not. The outcome isn't decided by you alone or what device you are pairing with - guaranteed.
The environmental impact alone should give one pause. As the batteries will go out and make the heaphones next to useless. Tech-savvy ones might replace them but that is hardly the norm. Yet my corded headphones are over a decade old sounds better than what apple is offering at a fraction of the price.
They do not have active noise cancellation though - and that is a killer feature! For some situations... Not in my home, where I use them. Because I have the option to do so.
> I will tell you this, I do not miss headphone cords at all.
I do. I am at the point where I literally have to buy low-end phones just to still have a headphone jack.
Stuff gets lost, stuff breaks, I don't want to pay hundreds of dollars every time a little bud goes OOPS. I don't see any benefit of wireless headphones, I seem to have the superhuman ability to manage cables without effort.
My headsets never have dead batteries. Are cheap to replace, and have excellent audio quality. I guess I'm not the target audience but you'll have to add my "WTF" to the chorus in regards to $500 headphones.
I bought a cheapy pair of heyday headphones ([0] but w/o active noise cancellation) a few years back because I wanted over-the-ear headphones with both Bluetooth and 3.5mm stereo jack. I used these in the office for music, on the bus for podcasts, as hands-free for my phone, etc. It was fantastic. The only complaint I really had was that the Bluetooth mode didn't work with my phone's mic. When they broke recently, I decided to pick up some Sennheisers[1] with similar functionality.
With both of these, there have been times when the cord got annoying, but I really like having that option. I've had these new ones almost two months and have probably charged the batteries once. That's about on-par with the heyday pair - probably less frequently, truly.
People hate on the 3.5mm jack, but it never fails, and I think the hate it gets is disproportionate to how much people actually struggle with it. And if you do struggle with it on occasion, having the option to flip between Bluetooth & 3.5mm is easy peasy.
Not to mention spending five minutes untangling cords every time I take them out of my pocket, even when I want to listen to something for like 20 seconds.
Unfortunately your average consumer is not going to miss the inclusion of a 3.5 mm audio jack, but it really sucks if you're a musician.
There are a bunch of really good soft synthesizer apps for iOS that work with a midi keyboard but Bluetooth latency makes them virtually unplayable. With a standard 3.5 mm jack it's not an issue. You can buy a dongle but that's just one more piece of complexity.
Almost all bluetooth headphones on the market have a 3.5mm jack on them at least currently and every device that dropped the jack works with one of those very cheap usb c to 3.5mm adapters.
That's not really the issue though, you have two devices that you have to plug-in, the midi keyboard and now the adapter which means you have to use a splitter or usb hub. In my experience it's not usually very seamless and can sometimes cause issues with detection of the midi keyboard properly.
EDIT: I have no idea where you're getting that figure but I just looked at three different pairs of Bluetooth headphones that I have in my house, Soundpeats, TOZO, and an LG. None of them have 3.5 mm jacks on them.
I've had my share of connectivity issues with corded headphones, like pulling the cord out of the jack accidentally, breaking the wire inside the cord, not being able to walk away from the device I'm connected to without taking off the headphones, etc.
Yeah this is why it has been hard for me to pull the trigger and actually commit to wireless headphones. Except for the wire part, these are great! Removing that little wire apparently makes this a difficult engineering challenge.
> With the spatial audio they're actually cheap if you figure I'm done with any Dolby Atmos, 9.1, 7.1, 5.1 etc stand alone setup. I'm watching movies with this.
Spatial audio is a replacement of true surround sound to you? it's a gimmicky weird audio effect to me. Zero sense of sound source behind or in front of me.
Humans have limited ability to discriminate between directly in front and directly in back based solely on cues encoded in the audio. It is a well-known ambiguity in how we hear space along that narrow axis. How you arrange the sound sources doesn't matter much. Research has demonstrated that human perception of a sound being "front" or "back" is determined by non-aural sensory cues. Specifically, if you can see a plausible sound source in front of you, you will hear it in front of you. Front-to-back spatial discrimination is based almost entirely on the visual cortex providing a model of the space in which the sound notionally exists.
In practice, humans subconsciously compensate for ambiguous front/back spatial positioning by turning their heads, putting the sound source on an axis where they do have excellent spatial discrimination. For obvious reasons this doesn't work well for headphones. Unless, of course, you have some kind of head tracking built into them.
I'm sure visual sensory input factors somewhat into how audio positioning is being processed by the human brain.
However an audio experience w/o visual input via physical surround sound sources provides convincing and precise positioning of audio sources. So that indicates visual input is just a tiny factor.
What I struggle with given all audio enters the two years, regardless of headphones or multiple speakers, why is the latter so much better at conveying "surround" sound than headphone? Does this distill down to a simple scenario of sound waves entering the two ears?
A lot of this research was done at NASA Ames in Mountain View. That's how I became familiar with it, I met some of the people working on it (a very long time ago). They had a lab where you could sit at the center of a sphere of speakers where they ran experiments on spatial perception of audio. It was really interesting. Broadly speaking, headphones should outperform surround speakers for spatial perception in absolute terms but it is much easier to generate quality spatial perception with cheap speakers than cheap headphones because of how it interacts with biology (see below).
In short, two "microphones" (your ears) is not enough to place a sound in 3-space, which makes audio illusions and perception gaps possible. Beyond time-of-flight and amplitude differentials, the human ear acts like a notch filter where the notch frequency changes as a function of angle of incidence. We don't hear the notch but the brain uses it to infer angle in a plane. This has significant issues e.g. it doesn't work well for new sounds with novel spectral signatures because we can't discriminate between a natural notch frequency and one created by the ear. It is possible to synthesize audio that breaks this part of our brain by synthesizing a set of cues that violate the laws of nature -- it is pretty uncomfortable. Creating spatial perception through signal processing has a couple limitations:
First, every human ear has a unique notch filter pattern. Spatial audio over headphones, which partially bypass the notch filtering, works best when they literally insert a microphone into your ear canal and measure the unique notch filtering patterns using test patterns. This can be fed into the software algorithms to create more accurate spatial cues for your unique ears. The perceived result is qualitatively different. There is no universal algorithm that works for everyone.
Second, the relationship between your ears and the sound sources don't change with headphones. In nature, animals either change the orientation of their ears, to basically sweep the notch frequency cues (humans have vestigial biology for this) or in the case of humans we move our heads for both notch frequency and time-of-flight cues. With headphones, the sound sources turn with you, so it produces no cues.
To make natural sounding spatial audio work on headphones, the audio source needs to be able to detect changes in head orientation in real-time and apply appropriate DSP to the raw audio. This is less of a problem with surround sound speaker systems because head motion provides these spatial cues naturally. I haven't tried it out but Apple's real-time head tracking plausibly provides the necessary DSP inputs to produce a spatial model that tracks as good or better than external speakers. Where external speakers fall short is that, unless you are in a carefully acoustically treated space, the space itself injects all kinds of spectral, temporal, and amplitude artifacts that unpredictably degrade the spatial cues in the audio.
>. I haven't tried it out but Apple's real-time head tracking plausibly provides the necessary DSP inputs to produce a spatial model that tracks as good or better than external speakers.
Apple's spatial audio head tracking is unreliable at best. I can fool the system easily by rotating my head at a speed that is slower than a snap rotation, side to side.
Even when the tracking is working properly, it sounds like simulated surround sound from home theater receivers of 20 yr sago.
> It is possible to synthesize audio that breaks this part of our brain by synthesizing a set of cues that violate the laws of nature -- it is pretty uncomfortable
Do you need special equipment to do it, or can it be done on a PC with speakers? I'd be quite interested in listening to this
Yeah I'm skeptical about the statement as well. If you used a good binaural microphone [1] to record someone talking in front of the dummy head, and behind, in a small room, then played the audio back to someone through decent headphones, I'd be tremendously surprised if they couldn't immediately discern which recording was which.
I own binaural recording equipment. My experience along with listening the golden standard of binaural recording (the barber shop simulation) indicates front and rear positioning is still not possible with binaural.
The left/right sound stage is huge though in binaural recordings!
I agree with the general "it's expensive but for that price it just works" statement.
For example, with AirPods Pro, you get automatic switching between devices, easy pairing, true wireless earbuds, wireless charging, great ANC and all that in an incredibly tiny package.
But with these AirPods Pro...do you see anything they do that others don't? They are not lighter. Their battery life isn't better. They're not objectively prettier. Their case looks worse. They don't charge wirelessly. There's not a lot of gain to be had in comfort as opposed to earbuds (competing headphones from Bose for example are plenty comfortable).
So...from what we already know, they have one thing others don't and that's the "magical" pairing and switching. And they are $250 more expensive.
This means either they sound incredibly fantastic, or they are way overpriced.
> I agree with the general "it's expensive but for that price it just works" statement.
One thing a "disparity" (as in variety) of wealth creates is slices of populace where the value of the solution is worth vastly more. Tech that "just works" is one such place. People placing higher value on convenience ...
Another such place that is interesting is healthcare. Some portion of the market places longevity or health optimizations way beyond the traditional insurance models. They're willing to spend far and beyond the marginal savings from prevention to avoid health issues. An example might be taking expensive NMN/NR to potentially avoid future health issues, despite costing 100s per month.
The previous top-end for Apple's headphones was the ~$350 Beats Studio Wireless 3, which I've had a pair of the past three years. I often forget I'm wearing them when I've put them on just for noise canceling (without any music) until I bonk them with something, and their Bluetooth has been fine in use with a variety of Apple and non-Apple devices. Their biggest defect in my use has been that their folding mechanism leaves a slight indent on one point on the earcup foam. They're fine, but my desktop headphones have better quality (as they should, given the 5-10x increase in investment in them).
I expect that the $550 AirPods Max will be exceptional, and comparable in quality to my desktop headphones, which will be an achievement for anything portable and wireless. The flatpack case solves the non-portability of the Beats (which have a case the size of a watermelon), and they've removed the logo and reconstructed the earcups to not get tangled in long hair.
That's the kind of improvements I expected from Apple, and they appear to have delivered, at a price point that's about what I would expect for something that delivers impeccable audio (and sets them up for $150/$350/$550 market segments). The Studio beats are great, but these will be better. My biggest fear is that they'll be better than my desktop headphones. Works for me.
The Sony 1000XM3/4 series actually does all this and more already and has been for the last few years. Of all the noise cancellation headphones I've tried they're the best out there in the market and you can have them for less than $500. What am I missing here?
No, just no. I got so tired of my airpods not connecting randomly, automatically switching to other devices at random times, losing most of their charge after a year, and so on, that I literally just use a pair of wired airpods now and it works great. Oh, except that Apple decided iPads should have USB-C but not iPhones, so now I can't even use my lightning airpods on more than one device.
This Apple worship is the ultimate banality of consumerism. The Airpod max is about the dumbest thing I've ever seen Apple produce. I personally think it will be a big flop, but I guess we'll see.
I regret my response here as being overly dramatic. I think I got triggered by some of the obvious Apple worship going on. But my response isn't much better.
On smartphones and tablets I can definitely agree with this sentiment. There's just nothing close to the reliability and comfort that iOS gives you (Used Nexus/Pixel for 5+ years and finally had enough and switched this year back to iPhone. God was my life so much easier).
On earphones I'm not so sure. My Sony 1000XM2 works really well and I don't have advanced needs like switching devices constantly or sharing the audio with another person. Then again, maybe we just didn't know something is possible before somebody actually delivers it out there.
The "spatial audio" thing I don't think would be a very good argument though. The promotion materials are extremely vague and I don't have much confidence that the noise cancelling/sound quality of this will be night and day compared to other established earphones. So I'm not caring too much about that aspect. As long as the sound quality is not worse than Sony/Bose/Sennheiser I'll be fine with it.
the current airpod pro's don't "just work". On numerous occasions the right/left airpod gets unpaired. The charge level of each piece is independent, which is odd considering both are placed in/out of ear simultaneously. There are even issues with the UI on the iphone to show the charge level. I have to open/close between 2-3 times to be prompted with the screen.
Having said that, as a whole, the airpods do "just work" more than other bluetooth headphones, especially with the case that holds a charge.
I've read your comment and most of it makes sense. Then I sat for a bit and all I got in my head was: ffs it's $500 for some headphones. To me, this is a poor man's luxury item. It reminds me when the latest and most expensive iPhone came out.Two people bought it: the CEO and the young woman who was on the lowest salary in the company. For one it was pocket change, for the other it was 2-3 weeks earnings.
Bluetooth for audio is a solved problem. I recently bought 3 pairs of headphones, one pair no name Chinese, one pair of bose and oneplus buds. All 3 connect, switch devices (laptop, phone etc) seamlessly. I understand there may have been issues in the past but my experience the last year tells me otherwise.
I guess you never have guests? Also a pair of headphones wont differ that much from a 2.1 system that'd I'd use that as an argument, it's all psychoacoustics mostly at that point.
Also, when talking about speakers, what upgrades? You don't need yearly upgrades with speakers, unlike with Apple headphones. In the past ten years, I've spent about 400 dollars for a pair of Yamaha studio monitors fit for professional audio use, certainly for light audio entertainment as well. They'll still take any Apple headphones through the ringer in terms of quality.
I bought the airpods when they came out. After 1.5 years of use, I get 5! minutes of talktime. Apple says "tough luck". No more headphones from Apple for me.
> Compare this to even the least expensive stand alone 5.1 system and it's a very inexpensive alternative.
I've had the same DTS/Dolby Digital 5.1 system for nearly 20 years. It still works flawlessly. I very much doubt that these headphones will be functional in 20 years time.
My current wireless headset costs $10. My wife bought it on sale, cheap Chinese crap, but I'd prefer to go through 10 pairs in the next year than shell out $500. That price point is crazy
Apple Airpods don't connect to my MBP without a big delay. Maybe the firmware needs to be upgraded but I can't do it with my MBP and I don't own any other Apple products.
>I want to put them on and they need to make noise.
>I'm not dealing with connectivity issues, battery issues, etc.
>Battery, I need to be able to easily and quickly know what the status is and I need to know that if I plugged them in before I go to bed I'll be good to go all day, the next day and I don't have to think about charging.
>Connectivity. When I go to use them I need them to connect and work. No fiddling around with loss of connection or not connecting in the first place.
Wired headphones tick all these boxes. If not for Jony Ive's quest for a legacy and absurd fetish for thinner phones we wouldn't have to live the dongle life to have every feature you listed.
Yeah, I don't want to get dragged into the whole debate about headphone jacks again, but as long as someone else is saying it... headphones worked! They always worked. You plugged them in and they reliably made sound, everywhere, with high-quality audio. This comment is surreal.
And yes, I get that a lot of people do want to use wireless headphones. I'm not here to argue about that, there are legitimate reasons why people want to get rid of wires. And I also get that these headphones are filled with other features like auto-pausing, noise cancelation. There are reasons someone might look at those features and think they're worth the price. But still -- to see the primary reaction be that the important part is "just working" still feels kind of validating to all of the people who originally called out Bluetooth headphones as a step backwards from where we were.
I remember getting a lot of pushback from people who were all telling me that wireless headphones were going to get really cheap, and most of the growing pains were already over, and we were all just being ludites. But what am I supposed to think when I look at your high-tech future world, and the most popular comment is someone saying that they'll drop 550 dollars on a pair of headphones before they've even heard them, even though they'll only last 3-5 years before the battery dies -- just because it's worth that much money to have a device that reliably plays sound? How am I supposed to look at that and not come to the conclusion that the wireless market is still wildly inferior to the cheap, reliable, high-quality audio devices that came before?
It's been however many years since Apple's removal of the headphone jack and practically every high-end Android manufacturer has since copied them. And what we see is headphones that are specifically designed to work with one brand of phone/computer, that are outrageously expensive, and apparently that expense is justified to some people because the entire rest of the market is filled with options that have minor-to-major irritations during daily use.
If what OP is saying is true, then a $50 over-ear pair of Koss headphones will be more reliable and have fewer daily annoyances than most bluetooth-only headphones. And while I'm sure plenty of people disagree about bluetooth reliability, enough people here do seem agree with them that their comment is the first one you see when you enter the discussion.
I don't believe audio quality is perceptible enough that you need to spend $500 on a pair of wired headphones. But even if I did believe that audio quality was perceptible enough to require that kind of money, I also don't believe that the AirPods Max are going to match the raw specs or numbers of those $500 wired devices. And regardless, that's all kind of besides the point. The AirPods Max have plenty of exciting features tacked on, but those features aren't the primary reason why OP is excited -- they're excited because:
> I want to put them on and they need to make noise.
Well, you don't need to spend $500 to get that. Wired headphones were good at that. That was never a question or a concern that anybody had about them. Even with the awful low-quality $15-$20 solutions, you never doubted walking out of the store that when you plugged them into any audio device, sound was going to instantly come out of them as soon as you pressed the play button, even if it was a phone that your friend owned, even if it was a random ATM on a street corner, even if it was a 5 year old MP3 player or game console. They just worked.
I am a total apologist for the price of the AirPods and AirPods Pro.
I have tried a lot of wireless earbuds. Jabra, Samsung, Jaybirds, Anker…and none of them have the combination of bullet-proof pairing, keeping a connection, audio quality†, and sound cancelling†. †(AirPods Pro, for these.)
But hoo boy, $550 is a lot for more traditional headphones. The price premium for earbuds feels right to me, as you have to do the engineering to jam as much battery, antenna, and circuitry into a teeny tiny space as possible. But big ol’ can headphones? C’mon, you have so much more volume to work with, it should make them easier to design and manufacture, not harder.
> bullet-proof pairing, keeping a connection, audio quality
That'll be because Apple products use a custom protocol to iPhones, whereas all other brands have to use basic bluetooth, which has crappy sound quality, arbitrary restrictions, poor handling of weak signals, lots of delay, and is hard to pair.
Apples walled garden doesn't allow third parties to design or use their own protocols, or use apples protocols, so it's far from a level playing field.
The industrial wireless microphones and headsets used in TV production are exceptional for sound quality and delay.
They require a special license to use, and require dedicated hardware (ie. they won't connect to a phone). Shows whats possible if walled garden and regulatory constraints are lifted though.
I'm not sure what they're talking about... Pro audio gear doesn't need a special license unless it's old spectrum that was purchased largely to roll out low band 5G a few years ago. 99% of the industry has moved on though.
Also, a lot of movie stuff, especially at budgets below AAA box office extravaganzas, still use wired gear. Zero latency, no potential audio loss, and dirt cheap.
> Yes. It may not be a word that you like, or a word that you would use in a term paper, but irregardless certainly is a word. It has been in use for well over 200 years, employed by a large number of people across a wide geographic range and with a consistent meaning. That is why we, and well-nigh every other dictionary of modern English, define this word. Remember that a definition is not an endorsement of a word’s use.
I'm totally in agreement with you. Sony, Bose etc. show that you can build a fantastic pair of noise cancelling "prosumer" headphones in the $250-350 range.
I'll accept a $50 markup for Apple's tight integration and marketing. That's $400.
$550 (or, in Europe, $775...) is a ridiculous price.
I paid $349 (I think) for my Bose quiet comfort headphones, and they are good - but there are flaws that I wouldn’t be opposed to seeing corrected for a higher price. To each their own I suppose.
I think most people here have their doubts that they will actually be an upgrade over the QC35 or the WH1000XM4. They'll undoubtedly have a better pairing experience and the head tracked spatial audio is unique among over-ears, but there's a chance of losing in sound quality, noise cancellation ability (active & passive), comfort, and battery life. Also based on phrasing at the bottom of the page it's possible that they will only work with Apple products. We'll have to wait and see how they compare.
I expect them to be a solid step up in sound quality.
I don't understand why people would expect otherwise given the advancements with Airpods Pro and Homepod. Apple has a clear R&D advantage over competitors, and I think it's going to be that much better in a larger format without the space constraints of the Airpods Pro.
- What makes you think these would be less comfortable than QC35s? People love the comfort of their existing AirPods.
- Battery life will be the same (20 hrs).
- Given my experience with HomePod sound quality and the quality of my Macbook Pro speakers, I expect the sound quality of these to be better than QC35s.
I didn't say I'm assuming any of the negatives are true. I'm saying they're unknowns. If they manage to do well in those categories I listed off, then I can see them being worth a good chunk of money.
> Bullet-proof pairing, keeping a connection, audio quality†, and sound cancelling†. †(AirPods Pro, for these.)
Guess we are ignoring the fact that this bullet proof pairing and keeping connection etc work only with Macs and iphones. Anyone here care to list how these perform if you have an android phone/tablet, a windows PC, a kindle etc etc. Or do I have to buy another pair of headphones to use with those devices?
They're not that far off higher-end over-the-ear ANC/wireless headphones, give or take Apple's brand premium (which many other makers of expensive things also happily apply). That's not to say they are cheap but it feels closer to existing market pricing than $250 wireless earbuds - a move Apple pulled off seemingly successfully.
If by "not far off", you mean "over $200 more". For consumer devices: The Sony 1000XM4s are $270. Bose QC35 IIs are $265. You'd have to go up to pro-grade gear, such as the M&Ds or Beyerdynamic Amirons, to match this price. Maybe Apple headphones are pro grade, but the AirPods are not, so I don't think they're going for that market segment.
They're right there in 'wanky headphones from a name brand'. Amirions are more expensive and have no ANC. The gamer Audezes (no ANC, the processing stuff is only wired) are $500. Lots of other stuff you can find in that price range from B&O, etc.
Master and Dynamics are not "pro gear", and while Beyerdynamic traditionally is, they have dipped their toes in the consumer space for a good awhile. This is right up there in that space IMO.
This is the early adopter fee. Wait for black friday or some other steep sale. I snagged some Airpod Pros for $169 at the last one, much less hesitation hitting buy at that price.
For all the complaining about the pricing here, just set a reminder to yourself for 1 year later, when the pandemic has waned and some workplaces begin to return to normal. Then take a visual survey of how many people are wearing these in those hip open office development workspaces.
You'll see the pricing didn't matter at all. You'll probably be wearing a pair yourself when you do that visual survey.
And if you're actually the target market for that stand and monitor, they are also quite a bargain, because if you're not mounting that monitor on that stand, you're mounting it on a more expensive rigging.
I have a feeling that this 'allows' Bose and Sony to raise their prices causing everything to normalize around $500 price range. Remember the original pixel (or nexus)? they were priced around $350-$400 and look where they are now ($700).
Likewise, smart watches used to cost in the neighborhood of $100 until Apple Watch came on the scene and now everyone thinks it’s normal to pay $300 for a smart watch. It was ridiculously overpriced when it started, and it’s still ridiculous now
I have 3 Pebble Time watches, 2 of them still in the box, to replace someday the one I wear for already 3 years. Paid $150.00 for each of them.
I wouldn't trade any of my Pebbles for a Apple Watch.
Edit: what I mean is that I consider the Pebble far superior to the AW: customizable and easier to program, with a longer lasting battery and display always on.
> I consider the Pebble far superior to the AW: customizable and easier to program, with a longer lasting battery and display always on.
Sure, but this argument can be easily taken to its logical absurdity. Someone who just needs a watch that shows the time & date and has a stopwatch can get a Casio which accurately does all this and has a battery that lasts years, in addition to an always-on display (note: for what it's worth, the Apple Watch also has an always-on display). From that perspective a Casio is vastly superior to both a Pebble and an Apple Watch ;-).
For some people it is. I got a digital wristwatch to help with time blindness associated with my ADHD. It beeps every hour, and it has vibration alarms for appointments, timers, alarms, etc... I very purposefully did not get a smartwatch, because a simple watch that I can wear everywhere, that I never forget to charge, that will never develop a glitch or need to be updated, with an interface that is hyper-focused and does exactly what I need without distractions -- that's a superior product for me. And the fact that it was only $35 is a bonus, but it would still be a superior product even if it was $200. The cost isn't the reason it's superior.
So I do get what you're saying, and you're kind of right, but there's absurdity here in both directions. A superior product is not necessarily just one that has a bunch of features crammed into it -- it's one that solves a lot of problems without introducing new problems. If you stick text notifications into my microwave, or a charging port onto my shoes, you haven't actually improved those products.
There's a little bit of irony in having this discussion about a company like Apple, which was lauded for a long time for building interfaces that were purposeful and simple. It was the Android crew ran around talking about how iPhone was behind the curve because it couldn't do multitasking or set up FTP servers, while Apple confidently asserted that building a good, focused device was better than trying to do literally everything everywhere.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that making a product more powerful or capable is orthogonal to making it superior/inferior, and trying to equate the two concepts in either direction can lead you to absurd conclusions. Of course, for many people, the Pebble watch would not be powerful enough; they want/need the extra features in the Apple Watch, just like many people wanted/needed the extra multitasking features in early Android devices. But for people who don't need those features, the Pebble was a superior product because it did its job better and didn't introduce distractions or compromises to accommodate unnecessary features.
It's good that powerful smartwatches exist, but it's unfortunate that there's now an unsatisfied niche of people who are left wanting a more elegant, purposefully designed device that costs less money. At least (thankfully for me) the Apple Watch didn't mean the end of good old-fashioned Casio and Timex watches, because for all of its power, the Apple Watch isn't capable of helping me with my ADHD. It's too complicated and has too many significant tradeoffs to be even useable as a daily driver the way I want to use it, regardless of how much it costs.
That doesn't say anything about the parent comment. I also had the pebble time steel but now use an apple watch s6. The AW probably does 4x what the pebble did making it look like a bulky notifications window on my arm.
I mean if all you need is a watch with a customisable watch face sure, but you are clearly overlooking several things like inbuilt eeg, lte connectivity etc of you dont need them its okay, but pebbles are no way near apple watch.
More than make the price reasonable, I would wager it was to anchor the Apple Watch in the "watch" category, rather than the "electronic gadget" category in people's mind. It's not some $XXX toy for notifications and whatever. Much like watches, it is as much about functionality as it about style. Much like watches, it both exists in a expensive, luxury form and in an everyday form. You're buying a Swatch, with Rolex available if you want - not a fitibit.
on top of that, they created their own gold alloy for it. One that allowed them to use less gold at the same karat weight! For that, you paid a premium. Genius.
The melt value of the gold was well under $3000, for a $17000 watch. Even it it had been solid 24k 99.9 fine (I believe it was 14k gold), it would have been a small fraction of the cost, and a low volume item to boot. I doubt the custom alloy contributed significantly to their margin.
I don't really see how that would work. The Sony XM3 and Bose QC35 II were regularly under €180 (VAT included) in the past days. Who's going to suddenly pay more than twice for the same?
And the original Nexus was expensive. So was the original Pixel. You can't really draw any conclusions from Google's inconsistent smartphone lineup and pricing over the past decade.
Cheap Nexus phones: 4, 5, maybe the 5X if you waited a bit.
Expensive Nexus phones: 1, S, Galaxy, 6, 6P.
Expensive Pixel phones: all of them except the 'a' line, sometimes ridiculously so given the poor experience.
Did that and got a second hand pixel 2. Battery needed replacing which is next to impossible without smashing the screen. USB port was struggling to hold on to the cable and google cut off software updates for it.
You can actually get a new pair of XM4s for $278 from Amazon. It's so much cheaper than the AirPods Max that you can buy a pair of AirPods Pro to go along with them and still have money left over.
And I doubt this is just any special price. The XM3s were always below MSRP.
I think you're right, but your example is faulty. The Nexus line started at $530. It was only a few of the later models that were budget. The successor Pixel line launched at $650.
Fact check: the cheapest original pixel was $650. The newest iterations, pixel 5 and 4a, are 700 and 350 respectively. A pixel 5 with 128gb storage is 700 whereas the original pixel with 128gb storage was 750.
Not bothering to look up nexus phones because they're from a different lineage than pixels, hence the different branding.
> Not bothering to look up nexus phones because they're from a different lineage than pixels, hence the different branding
You're just taking advantage of semantics then.
Anyone who's followed the Nexus line knows exactly what their wording meant, since Nexus devices did give way to the Pixel and did follow the price normalization this person mentions.
Iirc the Nexus 6
Or 6P was the start of rise in prices
They might be misremembering exact prices but I distinctly remember the backlash as Nexus devices went from strong values as dev phones to premium smartphones, then the Pixel dropped and solidified that
Which captures the original poster's point pretty perfectly: the Pixel line did completely abandon those value root until "budget flashship variant" recently became a thing throughout the industry...
which was mostly lead by Apple and the Xr
(and no, I'm not saying Apple made the first budget smartphone, they just popularized the idea of making a budget variant of a 12 hundred dollar phone and marketing them alongside one another)
The Xiaomi and Huawei phones offer much better values than the Pixel 4a, unless you put an enormous value on the software update situation (which of course is perfectly reasonable).
I will set that reminder. My guess is these headphones will be about as popular as the original HomePod. Not a failure, but definitely a niche-y product.
Apple's magic is making you pay just that bit more for a "magical" experience. Bluetooth earbuds: $100. AirPods: $159. Clunky smartwatch: $300. Apple Watch: $449.
However the price difference with competing products here is so large I think Apple has priced themselves out of the market here.
It's mind-blowing. It's like they've never walked down the street of a major city, and see the $200+ AirPods line are already the most popular headphones used.
I think that's a big part of what Apple sells. And I think it also helps explain how pretty much any Apple product announcement is contentious on here. Most people buying status goods won't say, "I buy it so people think I'm more interesting and important." They instead justify purchases in conventional terms like quality. That makes objective discussion of quality fraught because they create feelings of status threat and cognitive dissonance.
Objective discussion goes out the window because rather than look at the actual features of a product people instantly start claiming Apple products are fashion statements. So we end up with dead end conversations about meaningless things like this one.
Personally, I'm happy to look at actual features. But there's no denying they are fashion statements. For Jobs, this went back a long way. Look at the way the initial Mac and the NeXT compared to the competitors of the day. I definitely got involved with the NeXT just because it looked so cool. And honestly I stayed doing NeXT development work long after a rational person would quit.
And I think that carried forward. Look at the iPod silhouette billboard ads, which were iconic. [1] Those are not about features. Those are about how fucking cool the iPod was. The iPhone was demonstrably a status symbol. [2] And this has obviously worked well for Apple. They sell under 20% of all phones, but make 2/3rds of all phone profits. Actual features are not the only thing in play here.
It is possible to be happy to talk about more than one thing. If you don't want to talk about this particular subtopic, there are other threads. Instead, though, you seem eager to shut down discussion on it. You might think about why.
You've already dismissed anyone's thoughts about quality or features out of hand in your first post in this thread: -> "They instead justify purchases in conventional terms like quality."
And you have the balls to talk about shutting down conversations?
That's not "anyone". That's people who make a purchase for status-enhancing reasons. I'm also happy to discuss technical qualities of hardware, and do it often. But I like to do it with people for whom quality is what truly matters.
Is it not possible for more expensive products to be better than their less expensive alternatives? I am not saying there is a causal relation here, and I agree that to an extent Apple sometimes just throws out something mediocre (like this appears to be; I won't be buying this since it doesn't seem like a good value), but I think your statement is quite dismissive towards Apple as a whole and a bit snide toward users to claim they are only buying it for the status.
I don't think I said any of the things you are objecting to.
My point wasn't that status goods are worse. A Louis Vuitton purse is objectively a good purse. But people don't buy a Louis Vuitton purse because they've done a careful study of purse quality and just happened to end up with an LV one.
My point was that with status goods, it's hard to have an objective conversation about quality, because people invested in the status part of it generally won't talk about it in those terms. If you say, "Gosh, $3450 seems like a lot for a small bag," [1], they won't say, "Yes, but it makes me look important". They'll talk about how well made the bag is, how long it lasts, etc. They in effect become suddenly and specifically irrational. And if you push, they can get defensive. They might, for example, imagine you said a bunch of things you didn't actually say. Or accuse you of being dismissive and snide.
I guess I say irrational here because it's not just that they say a false thing. It's that they have a lot of trouble understanding when you say a true thing, or try to reason about the topic.
Eh, I feel the opposite. My Bose headphones are starting to wear out, and have always been kind of finicky in pairing and getting disconnected. It's worth it to me to pay the $200 more to get newer headphones that in all likelihood sound noticeably better, have spatial audio, and hopefully have no trouble connecting to and switching between Apple devices.
The one thing holding me back actually is, based on the reaction I'm seeing so far, wondering if there will be a negative stigma to these or if they'll attract a lot of attention. Like the google glass years ago where everyone noticed it immediately and thought you were a douchebag for wearing it.
Bingo. They have a very distinctive look. You buy these and people can tell from across the street that you’re wearing “those $500 apple headphones”.
If you think of apple as a tech company, their products seem absurdly priced. If you think of apple as a company that makes luxury goods that happen to be powered by computers, they make perfect sense.
Just bought a pair, I really like the sleek look. I think it fills a need in the market for headphones that work for both genders. It feels like the QC/Shure/WH-1000 were designed mainly for the male market.
They're not terribly expensive for high-end wireless headphones with active noise cancellation. Sennheiser's better wired models start at this range (HD660 S my current favorite, is about the same price).
It doesn’t make sense to compare these to the wired Sennheiser cans. These are targeted towards a completely different market. I’d be surprised if the sound quality comes anywhere close to HD660S.
Not really a valid comparison. If you buy a pair of high-end Sennhiesers, they'll last many many years. I still use my HD580 from the 90s. They also sell all the necessary spare parts and are easy to repair (mine have had new cables and pads). An Apple product be will be e-waste in less than 10 years, the glued-in battery will start failing in less than 5.
I think spatial audio might be the killer feature. They just added an update for the Airpods Pro, and some of the comments/reactions to it sound promising.
Homepods sound amazing in a stereo pair, and Apple just released an update for Dolby Atmos support.
I don’t understand why people like the spatial audio feature. How often do you move your head relative to your iDevice while watching a movie? The field of view is too narrow for it to make any sense.
If you ignore the above then the only trick that’s left is the fake 3D effect; which isn’t novel or even desirable for someone who cares about authentic sound.
One potentially useful feature would be spatial audio on conference call when multiple people talk - you can discern different information sources when they come from different direction. AFAIK that’s how fighter jet helmets work.
> Or how often do you watch movie with headphones?
Probably most people in the world.
I've rarely lived alone and always have roommates 25-35 and I'm amazed how much HNers lose touch when they get older, stop having roommates, live in a house, don't see how other people relax.
Maybe I'm coming off as mean, I don't want to. But also consider the new culture of permanently-worn earbuds. I know headphones used to be a hassle when I was growing up. But now you will notice people who never even remove them all day. So it's not extra leap to watch a movie on their phone with earbuds, something all of my roommates do.
I'm sure there are people who do that, but it's minority. On the go you'll maximum watch 15 minute YouTube while having lunch. Rest is podcasts/music I believe.
At home I prefer my laptop speakers over AirPods just because of comfort - audio quality doesn't overcome the hassle. Laptop speakers generally aren't disturbing flatmates enough.
I use the spatial audio feature on AirPods while watching on an iPad. You move your head slightly more than you might expect for that field of view, and the effect keeps the audio oriented to the characters or action on screen. It feels like you're listening to sound coming from the device instead of in your head. Big movements, like turning your head 90 degrees, or quickly moving to another couch seat, break the immersion.
I assume the same feature on any competing product would feel similar.
Could you please elaborate a bit more or may be just share a link. I was thinking about using 2 HomePods as a sound system for my TV, but figured it was too much to ask.
As far as I understand it: OP thinks people who complain about the price, think that they won't sell while people who complain about the price are either:
- making fun of people who would have to pay the price because they feel the peer pressure or
- are pissed because now every other brand who thinks it's fashionable will push their price because they know people will pay it or
- have perfectly working headsets already which were significantly cheaper or
Don't know about the "hip" workplace, but for me anyhow these are at least in concept perfect for the open floorpan office I work in (during non-pandemic times).
We haven't seen any reviews of these so it's impossible to say one way or the other.
I'm a bit put off spending $400 on a pair of headphones, let alone $550. But it's a bit premature to suggest A is better than B when nobody has actually touched A.
I won't be wearing them, they look absolutely terrible. Honestly like headphones you'd find at a dollar store bin (in terms of design.) But they will probably catch on, I think the AirPods themselves looked silly but so many wear them now as a fashion statement. Apple has somehow convinced people that they are a fashion/status company, it's incredible.
I think lot of Apple hate comes from not being able to afford it at some point in their lives and having seen others enjoying it. How else can we explain the hate, actual hate towards Apple. It can be argued well that Apple's products are among the most reliable of consumer electronics, and are user friendly.
I accept that fact when it comes to some of their products, just not their ear buds, and I'm sure not these either. Apple is a fashion company, it's time to wake up to that fact. Think back to their old iPod ear buds (if you're old enough), the white wires were a statement that you were affluent (why do you think they had them so prominent in their commercials with the dancing silhouettes?) Those earbuds were horrible. That was fashion, this is the same.
I have a pair of fairly premium headphones with excellent sound quality, and I also have AirPods — I actually grab the AirPods more often than my nice headphones just because of how convenient they are.
I got them for cheap, and I definitely wouldn’t pay $500 for convenience without exceptional sound quality (so I’m completely not interested in these new ones). But to say that apple’s headphones are not good is, honestly, just wrong. I love the AirPods for background music, podcasts, audiobooks, and phone calls as I go about my day. I owned a different set of wireless earbuds before the AirPods which were actually higher-quality and more expensive, but I didn’t like them nearly as much. Convenience and decent sound quality make the AirPods perfect for casual listening. Of course, still having a separate pair of actual high-end headphones for sitting down and really enjoying the detail in music in other scenarios.
I'm normally an apple user, butttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt (I'll explain that in a second) I have a pc for gaming and casual browsing. I bought a Microsoft brand keyboard under the assumption that it would be good since Microsoft hardware seems to be well reviewed when it comes to the surface line.
The keyboard is garbage, feels cheap, has dumb 'emoji' and office hotkeys that I can't easily disable or remap. And it typed that super long string of t's up there for some reason.
I know that apple has made bad keyboards, but I use one of their butterfly keyboards daily and it is better than the Microsoft one. I can walk into the apple store and know that even if I buy the cheapest product, it is still a well-built product.
I've tried to give non-apple hardware a fair shake, and it just never matches up. I had a project where I needed to use a windows laptop and the company provided me with a Lenovo Carbon x1 (admittedly not the most recent generation). I still can't believe that was what people recommend from Lenovo against macbook pros.
I'm shocked by how many people claim to be able to state absolutes about a product that they've never tried. How do you know your headphones offer better sound isolation and better sound quality?
Ya that's a fair point, but the flip side is that there are people in the comments ready to preorder, also without having tried the product. There's something cringy to me about that level of blind brand loyalty.
What? There’s a difference between buying a product before trying it and making specific claims about how its sound quality compared to other products before trying it or even seeing any reviews. I buy tons of products before trying them...that’s how you try them.
I suspect return policies are often used to justify unnecessary purchases. How many times have you bought something online you didn't actually want, but then didn't return it because it was too much of a hassle?
It's perhaps more fair to say that generous return policies reduce the risk of choosing a premium product in a category because they let the buyer verify the (subjective) value of it.
Who says that loyalty is blind? Typically the preorder purchasers have a bunch of other Apple products and are happy with them and trust that the headphones will live up to that. It might be optimistic (it definitely is sometimes), but it's based on an expectation built on history.
Active noise cancellation necessarily loses fidelity because it's imperfect technology. Passive 30db of noise reduction is a lot better. Likewise, cramming your entire DAC into one little chip is also a recipe for decreasing output quality.
As to quality, Shure IEMs are very close to as good as it gets, so even in the best case, apples cans wouldn't be better (though the speaker in their teardown doesn't look too good).
From a speaker stand point that may be the case, but I'm sure Apple threw a lot more money for the electronic hardware and software integration. I'm not sure why 10 audio chips are needed from a technical standpoint but it is probably different than what Shure does. Probably some innovations in digital to analog conversion and processing bluetooth data.
There's three reasons Shure IEMs don't need any processing to sound as good or better than the AirPods Max, and it boils down to physics too.
Firstly, the Shure IEMs are IEMs, not on-ear headphones.
Secondly, since they use physical isolation, there is no need for ANC, which means much less calculation power needed.
Thirdly, they bypass the outer ear. This means that the outer ear won't color the sound, which means that you don't need to correct for that (which is what modern autoequalizers do). Of course this is a bit less natural, but carefully tuned drivers work around that excellently.
Fourth, they are wired, which removes the need for processing the audio signal. Modern DACs are practically indistinguishable from perfection, so that's not an issue.
Fifth, they use balanced armature drivers instead of dynamic drivers. This means that they are not affected at all by resonance and other effects.
This is why Shure IEMs can do both better isolation and better audio quality than even experimental smart headphones. They simply eliminate all the issues by physical means.
The one issue that can't be quite fixed is that Soundstage won't sound as wide as would be possible with open back headphones, but these are closed headphones with ANC so it probably won't be any worse.
Basically, the point is to remove the physical issues so that you don't have to fix them in software. This is a lot more cost efficient and, for things like ANC that can't be done perfectly, gives a better result.
thanks for the informative post, the only qualm I have is that "wired" is an objective improvement. Obviously it is easier to get better quality with wired, but for many people,the benefits of wireless are a huge win over wired.
If that requires a lot of processing, so be it, but that is value added to many people.
Ordering is the rational thing to do if you're interested in these.
Best to judge them for yourself and then return them if they don't meet your expectations.
Waiting for reviews is ok too, though people seem to lose their minds when it comes to Apple (both for and against them). So the reviews are probably going to be even less useful than normal for headphones.
What's wrong with preordering? I bought them the moment they went up in the Apple Store. If I don't like them, or can't justify the cost, I've got about 3 weeks to return them. No problem.
That seems like an apples-to-oranges comparison. Apple makes (or at least used to make) their own IEMs, which are more directly comparable to Shure. They were also pretty good, and competively priced. But they weren't at all the same kind of products as a set of wireless noise canceling over-the-ear cans.
This whole "People just buy them because they are popular" thing is trite. AirPods were tremendously mocked when they were launched and became popular in spite of that.
You don't like them. Millions of people do. Lots of people don't value the things you (or I!) value.
I think its a valid discussion point and not trite to ask if OP thinks Apple marketing will win out or if they think the product is industry leading by some performance metric.
It seems like there's nothing but "never bet against Apple" type nothing statements backing up everything but I want to give the comments a reasonable shake.
What value do you place on frequency response versus ease of use? Is there a metric for being able to ride 20 miles on my bike without accidentally pulling them out by the cord? How about the metric for seamlessly transferring audio between sources? What is it worth being able to text my wife while riding my bike?
Once you've dialed in what all these performance metrics are worth, we can compare it to other headphones on a level playing field.
What is entirely trite is people assuming that they are smarter/ better/ more knowledgeable about a product than the people who actually buy and use it. It's condescending and flat out wrong much of the time. This idea that you can pin the desirability of a product down to 1 or 2 bullet points on a chart is frequently completely wrong.
It may be trite, and I have no idea if it applies to AirPods specifically. But it's certainly a true pattern with other goods. Just look at the amount of marketing that works to create the impression that all the cool or important people are using a product.
I actually dislike the rubber tips. The original AirPods fit my ear so well that I can shake my head without them coming loose, and comfortable to the point that I literally forget they’re there.
If they had better battery life, they’d be the perfect easy headphone.
I'm sure they work for some ears but you have to admit that Apple itself has categorized rubber tips as a premium feature even though much cheaper competitors have had that design.
I was in the same boat as you, normal Airpods stayed in my ear while running but the Pro Airpods kept falling off. I then found some third party foam tips on Amazon and that made the Pros feel invisible like normal Airpods.
Do you mind linking those third party eartips? I am in the same boat as you, original airpods fit me like molded, I could jump and run with not even a hint of earbuds moving inside the ear. While airpods pro tend to wiggle and not stay fully in.
The tech is good on the first one which makes up for the lack of adjustable tips (a few people I know couldn't use them because Apple's design doesn't work for their ears).
I'm a sucker. I just bought them. I love being able to switch between my iPhone and my Mac on my AirPods.
I have the Sony MX3's, and they are great. I don't like toggling between devices and having it automatically connect to my last used device, have to disconnect it from one, blah, blah.
This is what Apple does. They raise prices. People are stunned initially. Others follow, then those prices are the norm. iPhone was considered overpriced when it was released. I think people have always thought the same about Macs, iPad, Apple Watch, etc.
My Bose QC35's connect to both my Macbook & my iPhone at the same time. Hit play on either one, and sound comes out. Listening to something on my laptop and someone calls? It rings and I can answer.
I'm sure the AirPods Max will be pretty awesome in its own way though.
I have the QC35's and I love them, but they have drawbacks.
the audio quality for calling is disastrous, disabling (or turning down the noise cancelling) is impossible without their App, and the "primary" source of audio overrides the secondary source. Which can be an issue if you have something the headphones 'think' is playing, but isn't. -- common when my linux laptop is the primary source.
It seems a little silly to complain that a feature is missing from headphones when it actually exists, but the user has made an active choice to include a different feature instead. With always-on listening and easy activation from phones these days, I can't help but think that there's little reason to use the button to activate a voice assistant anyway. Not least of which is the dubious usefulness of voice assistants.
That's an excellent example of those seemingly minor but annoying issues which seems to be hard to get right without a complete control of the software-protocol-hardware stack (like Apple has). Also, that's the reason many are more than happy to pay Apple the "premium".
It’s not just about control of the hardware software stack, it’s about a dedication to providing a finished product.
Sometimes you need the former, but you always need the latter. Apple can be counted on to doing this more often and consistently than any other company.
I really do like my QC35's, but I agree the primary issues are:
- I can have 2 connected sources of audio (ex: phone/laptop). However, only one works at a time. So when I get a spam phone call, I loose audio for my ongoing video call until I decline the ring.
- I can't use wireless without turning on noise cancelling. This means, I can't really walk around and use them at the same time
> I can't use wireless without turning on noise cancelling.
QC35, at least QC35 II can set any NC level, including “none”, from the Bose Connect app (or the accessory button, if it's set for that purpose instead of voice assistance activation) while turned on.
Also wondering. Does a headphone like that even exist?
A BT headphone that can stream from 2 sources at the same time, mix the audio streams together, have the controls play/pause both sources at the same time, only use voice assistant from a primary source.
My guess is it's just too complex, and maybe there's no BT chip that can do 2 high quality audio streams at the same time that fits the power requirements for a 20hr headphone experience.
What I do is use an A2DP sink that sort of does this. But I need a Windows machine that pairs with all my BT sources, it mixes the audio output from the sources (along with the Windows audio), and outputs it to the default audio output. It's quite nice if you don't like taking your headphones on/off all the time.
I don't think there's mixing, but normal Multipoint keeps both connections alive, and switches to whichever has active audio coming. It can be a little annoying if you have notification sound on your phone stealing the attention, but generally it works pretty well.
But again, simple multipoint support seems to be pretty rare. I think the newest WH-1000X M4 finally added it, the Microsoft Surface headphones also have really good ones, and that's kinda it.
Some devices like Samsung instead use a fast switch, I think that's what Apple is doing here too?
Ok, can you explain to me how you do it? I have AirPod pros and the only way I can switch between devices is to go to the Bluetooth menu on the device I want to listen to and tell it to connect to the AirPods. That’s fine, and it doesn’t bother me much, but it doesn’t seem especially fast or magical to me. Is there a better way?
That's right. It's just not that easy with other devices.
Not sure how apple devices "just switch", it might be that they have multi-device bluetooth; or they have custom hardware.
But other devices are very "sticky" with their BT connections. My approach is mostly to turn off bluetooth one one device when I want to switch to another.
I have a pair of Jabra 65T active earbuds that I bought for $50 and they connect to multiple devices at a time and "just work". If they are connected to my computer and I am watching a video and my phone rings, they switch over without any intervention. At the end of the day when I hop on my Peloton they connect to that without intervention, too.
I am sure the Apple stuff works well too but let's not pretend that they are doing anything unique in this space.
With most BT devices the problem would be if someone else tried to use your Peloton, it'd steal audio from your PC or phone
But Peloton remembers your previously paired audio devices per user; so if someone else uses the bike and has never explicitly paired that set of headphones, they'll show up as an option, but won't automatically pair
If your devices are on iOS 14 / macOS Big Sur then you can just start playing music or a video on one device and the audio automatically switches to that device and pauses on the one you had previously been using.
Each device has a native place you select the Airpods from (MacOS: sound menu; iOS: the playback widget in the Control Center). Still a menu, but a little easier to going into the bluetooth menu.
Happy for you, however my mileage is completely different. Watching Youtube on the iPad having my iPhone lying next to it, pausing the video by taking one Airpod off. Then put it back and iPhone immediately steals AirPods Pro and I have to either connect them back to the iPad in Settings or play/pause/play/pause/... and wait about 20s seconds and they may reconnect. iPhone is lying face down all the time, no music or any sound activity in progress for hours.
I was initially impressed, but the quirks got more and more frequent and I actually hate the broken switching now.
"To turn off automatic switching, go to Settings > Bluetooth, tap the Actions Available button next to the name of your AirPods, tap Connect to This iPhone, then tap When Last Connected to This iPhone."
Heard about it but I would love to use switching if it worked :-( Btw the “AirPods connected” notification visible on the iPad while the built-in speakers are screaming at everyone around me is phenomenal.
Toggling between devices really needs to be implemented better. Wouldn't it be possible for headphones to have a button to switch "inputs" between devices they are paired to?
I've come to use NFC to switch quickly to my phone, but I can't really NFC back to my PC as easily. Several awkward clicks and menus later I can start using them on my PC. Not a huge deal sure, but for a premium device I'd expect something more streamlined.
I own Bose QC35II, and they definitely have a button to switch between paired devices. They do the switch automatically based on whether the sound is playing on your devices, but if both devices are playing audio at the same time you need to switch them manually by pushing the switch to Bluetooth position once (if you push and hold it goes into pairing mode, but pushing and releasing it quickly does the toggle).
You can turn on multipoint and switch sources in the app, but it's clumsy. AFAIK, there's no way to do it on the device itself (and that's disappointing). I loathe having to disconnect one source to connect another.
> Wouldn't it be possible for headphones to have a button to switch "inputs" between devices they are paired to?
Bose QC35 has such a switch toggle. It can be paired with four devices, and connected with two simultaneously. Switching between my private Windows computer, iphone and work-Mac is pretty flawless.
the Sony MX4's do this as well. They also are likely better at Sound and ANC.
The thing with the iphone is it was absolutely segment shattering.
Your iPhone comparison falls on deaf ears, as this isn't a defining product like the iPhone. The iPhone was stunning enough that people questioned the audacity. This is by comparison -- pedestrian for the price point.
> I love being able to switch between my iPhone and my Mac on my AirPods.
Is there some secret feature of Airpods that I don’t know about? I use Airpods everyday, but I still need to go to Settings > Bluetooth > Connect every time to change devices.
Don't think this is new. I have bose supersport, been using it for a couple of years perhaps. Battery lasts weeks, connects to both my work and personal phone as soon as I turn it on, and hit play on either device. And, I don't remember ever facing any connectivity issues either, just works since the day I paired.
I am not sure what other features airpods have but if this is "the" feature, you can have it even in products for about a fifth the price since years.
Only between 2 sources. Airpods can switch seamlessly between all my Apple devices without me needing to do anything. The only exception is my PC since I have to connect via Bluetooth.
As many as are synced via iCloud. I currently can switch between iPhone, iPad, Mac (multiples), Macbooks (multiples), and Apple TV and also Apple Watch. I also have them paired with my gaming PC and some gaming consoles but those don't automatically switch. I have to go into a Bluetooth menu and connect them but that's quick and no different from most Bluetooth headsets. The in-ecosystem stuff is the killer piece for me.
That's not the same thing. With Airpods, I can start a video on my iPhone, switch to my iPad for a bit, walk over to my Mac and listen for a bit, and then turn on the Apple TV and watch a show and they switch to every device seamlessly. If I use handoff from one device to the other, I can even do that same process with the same video and switch from device to device without doing anything with the Airpods.
Same boat here. I've already spent thousands of dollars on fancy audiophile stuff. Can you guess what I use to listen to music most? My Airpods, because everything about them is so damn convenient. Can't wait to get these, even if they don't sound quite as good as the ideal set.
Maybe I'm not as discerning as some but I grew up with music and a lot of hands on experience listening, writing, and producing it, including some professional training. I dunno, I guess for me, the bluetooth experience + noise cancelling + transparency + phone integration all just adds up to being worth more than the marginal quality improvement from the prosumer alternatives people have been mentioning.
After all, anyone who really cares about audio quality is listening on monitors in their sound isolated home studio /s
>Audiophile and Bluetooth is a contradiction in terms.
Not true.
Yes, bluetooth compression puts a ceiling on audio quality. However, the majority of sound output devices are so crappy that they don't even exercise the full bluetooh potential.
So if you couple quality sound output system with a bluetooh source, they can still sound much better than bluetooth + crappy headphone + crappy speakers.
Ah you got me, I'm a paid Apple shill, here to spread lies. When I woke up this morning, all I could think of was fooling hackernews user bitcharmer, but it seems I have failed, probably due to your exceptional intellect and commitment to talking about products you hate.
Could it possibly be that I'm actually just a rich guy who owns both fancy audiophile equipment and fancy Apple products, and happens to have his own opinions about them? Is such a thing even legal?
You called me ingenuine after you misread my comment and assumed I didn't understand the fidelity implications of audio over bluetooth. In fact, there is no inconsistency, I simply prefer convenience to marginal quality improvements.
(Actually, I prefer live performances to chasing after audio quality, which I think is really more of a gear-geek hobby than a musical one)
Oh, I find it fascinating how the audio gear industry has taught the consumers on how much money you are supposed to spend to have audio experience at certain level. Pay attention on audiophile arguments, they will talk in terms of money(i.e. 150$ headphones vs 500$ headphones) when talking about audio quality.
I always find the audiophile market to be borderline fraud. They sell CD demagnetisers, ceramic cable lifters and all sorts of items that don't make any sense whatsoever.
Apple is my hero in that regard, where you actually pay for the product experience instead for being part of some deeply troubling subculture where passionately debating about very expensive cables and gadgets without ever being able to pass a blind test on the claims is the norm, almost like cargo cult. The most eloquent writer wins the debate and thy have lengthy take down articles with graphs clearly showing that the mor you pay the smoother the curves become. I would't usually have problem with such things but they often slide into extremism and quickly pushing you on the money-spend-for-audio-performance scale where you are simply supposed to check you bank account to see what sound quality you are about to get. So god help you if you are buying an audio equipment and you decided to do some research.
There's an exponential curve of cost vs quality. Buying in the bend is best. The difference between a $50 and $200 pair of headphones is staggering. From $200 to $500 is still significant. From $500 to $1000 is extremely slight. From $1000 to $5000 is basically unnoticeable.
Apple looks to be using plastic driver cones more at home in a $30 pair of headphones while selling something at the inflection point where headphones get really good.
I'd bet heavily that these $500 headphones get outperformed by the $100 Sennheiser HD 280 pros. A $400 Sennheiser 650 will no doubt blow them away while still being $150 cheaper.
I mean, they do own Beats - they know exactly how to make headphones that are good enough quality and which sound nice for an average consumer. Now they can bundle that with some of their proprietary tech and that's how you can easily arrive at that price. No one will be comparing these with $500 Sennheisers because Sennheisers don't have all the features you'd buy these for.
Yeah, this. They're not trying to take over Grado's market, they're trying to sell more stuff to people who have already bought heavily into the Apple ecosystem and value comprehensive and simple functionality.
For example. I own Sony MX3s. They have decent sound and great ANC but the use is massively frustrating. Swipe controls don't work, the app sucks, pairing with multiple devices is a nightmare. But I keep them for planes, and use my AirPods pro for everything else.
If these headphones have sound and ANC at least as good as my MX3s, and in addition have the standard Apple package of features (insta-pairing with multiple devices, tightly integrated with iOS and Siri for effortless feature control, best in class microphones for voice calls, etc. etc., plus looking cool) I'll buy them and give the MX3s away in a heartbeat.
(Though... how do they charge? Its not clear anywhere I see...)
Happy owner of mx4s here. Great work headphones, but man the UX is bad. On top of everything you mention, it defaults to noise cancelling and turning off noise cancelling (I only want noise cancelling for travel, otherwise I like being able to hear) involves listening to a woman tell you what mode you are in while basically muting current audio. WTF SONY
And the fact that everyone is getting its name wrong is further evidence that Sony is terrible at naming things. It's a miracle the two new models of PlayStation aren't the PS-1000XM5 and PS-1000XM5D.
Same experience as the other commenters with my XM3s, sound great, battery life is great, USB-C charging is great (AirPods Max use Lightning again, thanks Apple), but the touch controls are really bad, using with multiple devices is annoying (XM4 improves the experience with two devices, but will still suck with more, maybe even worse because god knows how you manage which slot gets unpaired when you pair to a third device).
> AirPods Max come with a soft, slim Smart Case that puts AirPods Max in an ultralow power state that helps to preserve battery charge when not in use.
Let me tell you about power buttons: you hold the button, and then you can keep your battery from dying without having to carry around a special case.
AirPods Max are probably really nice, but have enough stupid Apple things on them that I wouldn't be looking at them unless they were the same price as Sony's.
The Lightning charging situation is a really unfortunate signal. I'd seen the Beats Flex announcement a few months ago where they discontinued the Lightning version and made the new ones use USB-C, and figured that meant they were planning to phase out Lightning in favor of USB-C and MagSafe. With these using Lightning instead of USB-C, that's obviously not the case.
So now if you've just bought an iPhone 12 and picked up a $40 MagSafe charging cable to go with it, you can go get the Lightning cable back out of the drawer because you're going to need it again for at least the lifespan of these headphones.
With the Qi charging case for previous AirPods (the various earbuds versions) they can charge off the same MagSafe cable as the phone (though without a magnetic connection for now).
Maybe Apple wanted to put a MagSafe pad on one of the ears for these, but couldn't make the magnets work without interfering with audio quality?
At the very least they could have gone USB-C, and then if you had an iPhone 12, AirPods Max, and an Apple Watch, you can charge everything using MagSafe Duo and a USB-C cable, which plugs into either the MagSafe Duo charger (for phone and watch) or directly into the headphones. But no, it's a Lightning port.
Oh my god naming things. That's another thing that basically only Apple does right. I still can't get over how many companies have decided that their naming scheme for consumer products should just be a bunch of random letters and numbers, I guess because they think it sounds more advanced and techey? Thinkpads are another massive offender here.
Even Apple screws it up. There's been periods where the MacBook Air wasn't the lightest MacBook. And there's some nebulousness over the Pro lineup (more so on the Mac - the i* lines are more clear).
Broadly speaking, "Pro" in Apple's line is "the more expensive version." It's mainly in the Mac Pro and iMac Pro where it's a particularly significant difference for professional use.
Feels weird how the AirPods have Pro and Max as separate totally different products, but in in the iPhone where the "Max" has been used before, "Pro Max" is one product.
The rumored name I heard for these was "AirPods Studio", but probably the right call to not use the word "Studio" in headphones that don't have an audio jack on them.
Do you also have these sound level bugs with your XM3, where you adjust down the volume before connecting and then the headphones adjust the volume back up to some level when connected? This has severly blasted my ears multiple times and I can't express how angry I get when that happens (its a miracle I didn't destroy them yet). Its just a shame they combine so good battery life, ANC and sound quality with such a bad software, to a point where I rather get mediocrity in all points than what sony is offering me. Since I got my AirPods Pro I rarely use the XM3s anymore so I will probably not directly jump for the Maxs but they will definitly be an option for me in the future
I think that's a case of the OS you're connecting to having a separate volume setting for Bluetooth headphones and the built-in speakers, at least from my use with an iPad that's how it works.
If you adjust the volume down prior to connecting, you're changing the speaker volume. When you connect to the headphones, it connects them at the volume you previously had used with the headphones. And when you disconnect, your speakers go back to the level they were at before you connected the headphones.
I've never seen them jump higher than my previously used setting.
Might be an iOS issue, but for me its even happening when I connect them, turn the volume down and then start playing something. The instant it starts playing the volume is adjusted up to some previous level. This has never happened to me with other bluetooth headphones / speakers
Also have the XM4s. If you go into the app, you can turn off "Notification and Voice Guide" under the system settings. It will then switch instantly when pressing the button without the woman speaking. Way better with it off.
I do agree though, the headphones are great, but the UX is clunky and nowhere near what apple could achieve with a fully integrated set of headphones.
Thanks I appreciate that. I would still prefer a positional switch but that will make a big difference..........once I download the app which I have never used because I just assumed it was bloatware. whoops.
Wait, so they are not even halfway through the transition to USB-C and they launch a new product with the legacy connector? How many cables do they expect us to keep around? I'll wait for AirPod Max S :)
Apple isn't transitioning their handheld lines to USB-C.
Their portable lines — laptops, laptop-sized pro tablet — all use USB-C for charging and peripherals compatibility. Their handheld lines — cell phones, earbuds, headphones, TV remotes — all charge with Lightning.
(The older end of the Beats product lines use Micro USB due to having been an Android ecosystem product prior to Apple's purchase; however, Beats products released this year seem to be Lightning.)
I treat the non-pro iPad as a "handheld" device, and the pro iPad as a "portable" device. There are probably more nuanced words in use at Apple for deciding whether a product gets USB-C or Lightning, but I'm not invested in my choice of words, just in highlighting the distinction between the two categories.
It's still used in new Apple products including all iPhones, non-pro iPads, the Apple TV remote, Magic Mouse, Magic Trackpad, and the charging cases for all AirPods.
USB-C and Thunderbolt 3 are different things. USB-C is a connector defined as part of the USB spec, which was developed in tandem with USB 3.1. TB3 is a different spec, basically an external PCIe interface, that uses the USB-C connector (used to use mini DisplayPort). Typically, TB3 ports are also compatible with USB 3.1, but I don't think that's a requirement.
but the use is massively frustrating. Swipe controls
don't work, the app sucks, pairing with multiple devices
is a nightmare.
This is a great expression of one of the primary issues facing the software (and technology) industry today: it seems like software is fundamentally just too hard to do right. Basic competency and non-broken operation is regarded as a hugely valuable luxury feature. It's a cornerstone of the luxury technology brand!
But... is software really too hard? If so, how does Apple do it, are they just better engineers than the people who work at Sony? Maybe, but that seems unlikely to account for the difference.
And of course I don't really know, as I'm just a person on the internet, but I have a hunch: I believe Apple can do better because they have so much vertical integration, i.e. real control over much more of the technology stack in their product.
Let's say Sony has some in-house devs, but they hire a team on contract for the app's actual UI. Sony's just going to write the API layer for the UI to talk to. Sony will also make some of the hardware, but they're using a prefab chip and some antenna they bought, and they'll buy some proprietary off-the-shelf firmware for the lowest layer.
But, maybe it turns out the antenna and the chip don't play nicely under some key modes of operation. They can't redesign either of them, because they're just buying those parts. They shop around changes, but it would exceed reasonable costs. Maybe the firmware should be able to compensate here, but it's closed-source, and the company that wrote it shut down and sold their properties to someone else that won't turn any request around in under a year. And then, Sony sells the division that was working on the API, and they end up finishing the job out as a contract. This leaves all the API<->UI planning to contractors talking through an intermediary who still works at Sony. So it goes. And we all end up with another expensive piece of crap that just doesn't work.
But on Apple's side? I bet way more of it is in-house, and what isn't is locked in on deals that make Apple by far the most important customer. If they need a change, they get it. Apple's teams just... write the software that needs to get written! Maybe they physically meet each other. The firmware gets fixed when it's needed. And Apple ends up with a 'luxury product' built atop "hey look, it actually works!"
Is my point that everyone should be like Apple, or SpaceX? It's clear that not every firm can have tight vertical integration. Most have nowhere near the size, power, time, or budget to do this.
So my point is that if software and hardware were open by default, at least we could fix the damn things.
Sony maybe made some decent hardware there. It need not be shackled to some crayola software joke, if only they (and all of us) weren't so darn proud of our intellectual property that we could never dream of allowing someone to take a wrench to it.
Things being closed is so built-in that it's hard to even imagine this: how would we fix the headphone software? We'd probably need (expensive, hard to use) ROM-flashing utility hardware, decompilers, and the ability to load arbitrary code onto Apple devices! Impossible! Well, it's all hard because we want it that way. It's safer, probably.
There's a simple reason. From the top down, the culture at Sony is, "it's good enough for 90%". And getting that extra 10% isn't going to be worth the investment. Those folks can go buy Apple.
I have dealt with SO many (and worked for some) software companies that live by this axiom. Get an MVP to market, who cares if its riddled with bugs and hobbles along with duct-tape and paperclips holding it together. "We're just going to throw it away and rewrite it later". Devs spend all their days fixing little bugs with more band-aids - dreaming of the day when they can re-arch it properly. But the truth is, that day is never coming. Why? Because think of the expense vs the gain. It literally is not worth it to have a better experience. The crappy version is already making money. Customer Service agents are cheap. Achieving Apple-level polish is simply not worth it to most companies. That's why you have Chrysler mini-vans dying after 5 years vs Honda mini-vans lasting 15 years.
This is also an important factor in why public-sector and government solutions cost so much more. They have to serve everybody, regardless of disability, the tech available, etc. etc. A company can just dis-regard the 20% of the market that is expensive to serve; governments, the DMV, etc. can't.
That points to the other part of the issue. It is not enough to insist on 100%. It is also necessary to develop those solutions efficiently and to develop the right things (have good taste.) Both Sony and the public sector cannot achieve superlative results, for different reasons.
The magic comes from proprietary protocols. My airpods pro switch devices intuitively, but when I pair them to my windows laptop with bluetooth things don’t work so smoothly anymore and they are just as cumbersome as any bluetooth headset. I think the core problem of bluetooth headsets is the bluetooth spec itself makes it impossible to deliver a good UX.
This isn’t just apple either. My logitech mouse is paired to my laptop via their dongle, and to my desktop via bluetooth. On the laptop the connection is rock-solid, on the desktop it loses the connection once or twice a day for a few seconds.
I’m convinced the problem is bluetooth itself, not the device makers.
There's probably a lot of truth to this. It does go against the common sentiment here that open everything is always better. Well somebody will improve it themselves, right? So why hasn't anybody improved the open standard Bluetooth yet to meet those same standards of quality?
I think lately openness is massively overrated. This stuff is hard to get right, and it takes a lot of high-end hardware and tight collaboration between full-time engineers to do it. Random people working part-time in their garages and collaborating over Github will never do it. It works sort of okay for a few particular types of projects, but fails massively for many others, particularly things involving hardware. Only big corps can manage the budget and coordination required to do it right, and they'll only do it if it's closed, so they know they'll get the revenue from customers who want it done right.
I think this is exactly the crux of the issue, but I see a big difference: Bluetooth being "open" doesn't mean much when the kernel and device drivers and electronics are all closed. What would them being "open" mean -- specs are available? No, it would mean they are built in a fashion that allows them to be modified. It would mean that tools are easily available to the lay to allow modification.
I fully agree that just publishing the spec of a chip does not enable random people working part time in their garages or collaborating over github to do it, but creating software and hardware from the ground up with modifiability in mind would enable that kind of ad hoc work.
Would it solve all problems? Would it fix every bug? No, of course not! I'm not saying that open source is the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything -- I'm saying that a world built out of proprietary, competing, closed-off little gardens at the least guarantees that that which was created sub-standard cannot ever be brought to par.
Let me fix my own damned watch, and I really might.
It's funny because your comment would make sense if the Bluetooth spec wasn't a product of design by committee by a bunch of big companies called the "Bluetooth Special Interest Group", but was instead the fault of someone hacking from home without pants on.
While in reality, we could pool together some money to buy pizza for a couple of weeks for some experienced embedded developer with some RF knowledge and odds are they'd produce something better. Without pants on.
> I believe Apple can do better because they have so much vertical integration
That is a big part of it. But how did Apple do well enough to vertically integrate? They were not the crazy powerhouse they are now for most of their history.
Another big aspect is culture. Apple chooses not to ship things they don't think are good enough. Put aside that they're not always correct. How many other shops do that? How many places stick to the schedule relentlessly, because shipping is all that matters to them? Convince themselves they'll fix the software problems after release?
A big part, I think, is a combination of knowing when it is 'good enough', combined with the courage, patience and money to keep building until you get there (or spike the project because you missed the market window).
Didn't Apple start integrated? The Apple 1 and Apple II were largely designed by them, the OS was written by Apple, they licensed Basic from Microsoft. The Integrated Woz Machine [0] ran the floppy drive. It seems like it's part of their DNA, they always try to do as much as possible themselves.
I am only guessing that Sony outsources software development to developers who don't even use Sony. Apple developers love Apple product, look around the third party software on Mac, their developers love the operating system, and use it every day. It makes a huge difference. Elon Musk drives a Tesla, so he knows what it feels like to be a customer. I doubt Sony executives use Sony headphones in everyday life.
I definitely agree with this. It's quite absurd how many devices have a broken experience in just less than ideal conditions.
About 2 or 3 years ago I was looking for some wireless headphones who don't suck as much and there's an absurd defect that is shared by too many of them, some of them even on the higher end; the loud beep when the battery is getting low, some even had a recurring beep when the battery still has enough battery to keep listening. It makes some kind of sense with how batteries work, but it just breaks the experience so much you have to wonder why nobody thought of simple ways to avoid this behavior, but then you realize that is quite likely that the product was only tested with full battery and nobody on the team uses it on daily basis.
They don't let engineers design and implement UX/UI's but instead have them create properly designed UX/UI by UX/UI people who know what they're doing? It does make sense, I have no idea where does the notion of engineers doing UX/UI came from, would we want UX/UI people to actually code the software delivering their designs? ;)
If I were to hazard a guess, it would be a culture of bugfixing and software updates post-launch. These headphones no doubt share a lot of code with Airpods. Code which has received numerous bugfixes throughout it's life. Coupled with their ability to actually push out firmware updates to their users without needing them to install a separate (buggy) app, it leads to the evolution of a very stable software platform over time.
I'm just speculating, but how much embedded code do you imagine Sony throws away and re-writes for every new headphone release versus how much is retained.
I have some over the ear bose headphones, and the moment I paired a third device (phone, tablet and computer) it starter to frustrate me, as it never got the device i want to use and have to use the app to disconnect from the other device. At least that is something that apple has much better than the competition.
Beats are widely considered to be overpriced for their audio quality. I think it's reasonable to expect the AirPods Max to be as well, but I think the main draw of this product is seamless integration rather than pure audio quality, and the question is whether you're willing to pay a (substantial) premium for that. I expect that many will be.
> Beats are widely considered to be overpriced for their audio quality.
Sound quality is also subjective at a certain level. Not everyone wants flat sound like an audio engineer. I like bassy music and headhphones (which the Beats are known to be).
Now, Beats may still be overpriced since they crossed into fashion, but I'm not a fan of this blanket talk about sound quality like it's always objective.
> Not everyone wants flat sound like an audio engineer.
That's what equalizers are for. The point of your speakers/headphones being as flat as possible isn't because it's the inherently best experience for everyone, it's because it's the most flexible experience. You can take a good set of flat headphone and ram the bass through the roof - it'll still sound great. You can't really do the reverse. You can try to equalize a bass-heavy headphone into something more neutral, but the result is worse overall, and a lot more finicky as a user.
yeah, no, I disagree - I have a pair of Sony's XM2 headphones and even when I set the "bass boost" to +10 they are still not as nice to listen to as my beats studio are. Yeah the beats suck for a lot of other music types, but for some they are still my favourite headphones, and I'd pick them over other brands any day.
Bass is like sugar. Lots of it produces a quick addiction to their consumer, but that doesn't mean they are good. Beats produce loud but muddy basses. Good bass will be more subtle, but at the same time clearer. Try a Sennheiser if you can, especially one over ear with cable. It's too bad right now most of the known brands produce poor quality. My wife was completely amazed when she heard her favourite track through good headphones, she heard new instruments and other things she'd never noticed before. But also be aware that better gear might sound worse when you use it to play bad records, because it will expose the bad quality more clearly.
Regardless of how the bass response is tuned, higher total harmonic distortion is objectively worse than less total harmonic distortion. Headphones are a tool to enjoy audio experiences, and a good tool should get out of the way of said experiences.
Higher total harmonic distortion is an objectively less accurate reproduction of the original sound. But people can have a preference for less accuracy and that is not objectively “worse” except on one single scale that the consumer may not value.
Just like sepia toned prints are objectively worse reproductions of the original picture.
That's a terrible analogy, would you buy a screen that has a fixed perma-filter applied to every input? The whole point of buying headphones that are neutral and accurate in their frequency response is that you can enjoy different pieces the way you want. You can apply any "filter" you want to color an accurate and versatile speaker, but you can't get a pair of beats to clear up the mids or make the bass less boomy.
I said nothing about your preferences, that was the generic "you".
My point is good headphones are neutral and versatile enough that they can do both, just like a good screen can make all sorts of different pictures look good.
It's about versatility and quality in different dimensions, and headphones/speaker that impart too much color to music tend to be very one-dimensional which would limit what you can do with them.
Reminds me of the 'bass boost' feature on a lot of consumer audio stuff going back to the 90s (or earlier)-- most of the time, it obfuscates & distorts the original mix and sounds muddier as a result, but people adapt to it and it sounds normal to them.
There's also the confounding effects of different volume levels producing wildly different mixes, of people's ears/brains responding to frequency ranges differently, and of different music types revealing shortcomings more than others (as anyone who's flinched at pixelated cymbals can attest). All of which make it seem like a more subjective thing because of the complexity of interacting variables.
Regardless, true audio fidelity is something that can be measured to a fairly detailed extent. The fact is, most speakers at most volume levels aren't great at it, just 'good enough'. It mostly boils down to: how much can you tell the difference? Just like with finding that optimal mp3 encoding rate to avoid those damn pixelated cymbals.
Numbers being objectively worse doesn't mean that the experience as a whole is objectively worse. If that was true no one would buy vinyl and the iPod never would have succeeded.
Sound is like food. People like different flavors and that is OK.
Yes, and the truth is that many people seem to enjoy the experience of listening to Beats headphones and enjoy that audio more than the audio from many 'better' headphones.
> Regardless of how the bass response is tuned, higher total harmonic distortion is objectively worse than less total harmonic distortion. Headphones are a tool to enjoy audio experiences, and a good tool should get out of the way of said experiences.
This is why nobody buys tube amps for their guitars. Everybody just wants flawless clean sound with no breakup.
Being "objectively better" on some metric does not mean that the metric matters at all to the target audience.
Uh no. I sometimes use a DSP to introduce harmonic distortion when listening to music. There is also a good chance the producer of the music has also introduced a great deal of intentional harmonic distortion already.
Marketing works, and people will believe that the audio quality is fantastic on awful products because the bass is boosted. They haven't ever used a good product, so they have nothing to compare it with.
Anyone that has tried my headphones that have V shaped sound (flat soundstage gets mixed reactions based on their preference) are blown away by how much better they are than their Beats, and at lower cost.
When people listen to my headphones and feel like they need to re-listen to their entire music collection, because they're hearing parts of the song they never heard before, that's how I know it's not all in my head.
> Sound quality is also subjective at a certain level.
apples != oranges.
subjective sound quality (what I like) is always subjective at any level, and objective sound quality (how well it reproduces an input signal) is always objective at any level.
> the main draw of this product is seamless integration rather than pure audio quality, and the question is whether you're willing to pay a (substantial) premium for that. I expect that many will be.
The main draw is that it's an Apple product, and it is yet another way for the rich and spoiled to signal their wealth
The upgrade pricing is still straight robbery. It's $400 to go from 8GB RAM / 256GB SSD to 16GB RAM / 512GB SSD.
The M1 Macs really just continue Apple's traditional pricing - the base model & price is fine, but the upgrades that you're almost certainly going to want are ludicrously priced and oh hey all the user-upgradability (or any post-purchase upgrades) was removed would you look at that what a total coincidence.
Whaaaaat? 15 years ago takes you all the way back to the PPC to Intel transition, Apple has released tons and tons of price competitive products in that timeframe. Not cheapest, but competitive.
The first Intel Macbook was easily the best and least frustrating Windows Vista computer you could buy at the time. Plus they came with OSX and a slew of great software out of the box that at the time you'd have to pay hundreds of dollars extra for on a PC.
The Macbook Air (even the crappy first revision) was without competition for its time and stayed that way into the early 2010s while everyone else was pushing Netbooks.
The first Retina MBP in 2012 had almost no competition at release with a comparable screen at the same price point.
The first 5K iMac was literally a free computer bundled with the 5k display panel.
The current Mac Pro and the pre-trashcan Mac Pro are/were price-to-performance comparable to other workstation class hardware packages from Dell and HP (they offer less configurations and update less frequently however).
The iPhone SE models are competitive.
The base model iPad typically stands without competition, you either get frustrating garbage on the low end or lower value Galaxy Tabs or ChromeOS or low end Surface tablets (or worse, an ARM based Surface tablet) on the higher end.
The Apple Pencil's price to performance ratio drove down the cost of that entire product segment by popularizing it. Previous $100 stylus options were much worse.
AirPods at their time of release were some of the cheapest completely wireless headphones available (most had behind-the-head wires still).
The new M1 model computers are also now very competitive for the performance they're showing.
Apple basically never competes in a race to the bottom and they rarely offer anything in the lowest tier of product pricing categories and they absolutely don't cater to everyone (especially PC gamers) but for the mid to high end they wouldn't exist if they weren't competitive.
If you consider security updates as a measure of longevity, that’s true for basically every single iPhone. Android are a 2-year device at most if you care about security (and are not a hacker), Apple is a 5-year decice; per usable year, Apple can be much cheaper.
And if you consider resale value, Macs have always been cheaper than competitors. A comparably performing dell was always slightly cheaper, but if you sold it 2-4 years later, the Mac came out ahead. And with the M1, it seems Dell doesn’t even have a sticker price advantage - unless you specifically need Windows, Linux or a configuration Apple doesn’t sell (like 64GB ram in a laptop), Mac seems to be cheaper.
> Android are a 2-year device at most if you care about security (and are not a hacker)
Apple are definitely leading the industry here, but my Samsung S7 (released Feb 2016) got a security update last month (even though Samsung has officially said it's unsupported now).
That’s good to hear. Perhaps thi by a are changing -
But do note that S7 wasn’t much cheaper (if at all) than the comparable iPhone when it came out; and this length of support is unusual for Android.
On the other hand, my 5-year old iPhone 6S got the whole new iOS14 update, and my wife’s 6 year old iPhone 6 seems to still be getting critical security updates occasionally, even though the latest OS that supports it is iOS 12, which was replaced over a year ago.
That’s not true. My first three MBPs (I tend to sell them after 3-5 years years, it’s nice that they hold their value), I specced out equivalent non Mac laptops. For size, screen, storage, ram, CPU, and graphics they were equivalent or lower cost than a non Mac laptop. I can’t comment on the last 5 years because I haven’t done the comparison in a while. That was even accounting for the Apple tax on components like RAM that (at the time) could be upgraded after purchase. Upgrading myself or through Apple, they were still price competitive.
This is really ahistorical. Apple definitely has had a few head shakers, but the "apple tax" is largely overblown.
Sure, they are never interested in the bottom of the consumer market, but that doesn't make them overpriced for what they are; they tend to be competitive with actual competitor units.
For me, they also survived sweaty conditions better than others I'd had before ("sweat resistant" was a joke on a couple of them, did not survive a summer afternoon run in Georgia). I only replaced them because they got washed and now sound very tinny (and are long out of warranty, costs as much to replace with new as to get Apple to replace just the ear pieces).
My sub-$300 Sennheiser HD1 closed, over-ear, BT (w/ cable option), active noise-cancelling headphones are hands-down the best purchase I made in a decade, maybe ever. I'm not a deluded "audiophile" poseur, but I'm a musician who cares deeply about music, and a software dev / architect whose family depends on my ability to focus deeply on my work, and I wear them for about 8h/day.
The thing is, Beats' build quality and technical design absolutely suck. The hinge is weak plastic, and even a little bit of over-opening them can and will break it.
This is leaving aside the relative merits of the electronics, audio quality and featureset, where they also fail to deliver for the $.
I'll never understand what led Apple to align itself w this overpriced junk.
Tell me about it. Did you know that Beats Solo 2 have this strange problem where at some point one of the ear-cups would stop functioning on Bluetooth and the way to fix it is to stick some aluminium foil into the audio cable jack? It's so ridiculous and I am amazed that someone the internet discovered this solution and the solution is working for the others, including me.
Apple's products don't break down by themselves but Beats do. My pair had the faux lather completely peeled off, the retracting mechanism on the one side lost its tik and I have aluminium foil stiffed inside the cable jack so I can listen in stereo.
They came as a promotion when I bought my Macbook few years back, which still functions flawlessly.
> Apple's products don't break down by themselves but Beats do.
Except the cables, which are terrible. I have two broken charger cables for a MacBook and a MacBook Pro, a thunderbolt cable from an Apple Thunderbolt Display, a Mac Pro power cord, an iPad charger cable and a couple of old wired earphones. All broken where the cables bend.
> I'll never understand what led Apple to align itself w this overpriced junk.
I don't think Apple bought Beats for the headphones, really. They bought them for the recently-launched Beats Music streaming service, which is what became Apple Music, and the added music industry connections that came along with Jimmy Iovine and Dr. Dre.
(It's also my impression that Beats products released after the Apple acquisition have been getting somewhat better reviews in terms of sound quality, but it's not a brand I really keep track of, so that could be wrong!)
Yep. I'm pretty sure the weird onboarding process for Apple Music -- tap bubbles that represent genres you like, or something like that -- was very close to Beats's original process. I'm not sure it still does that, since it was kind of weird and confusing. Beats Music had a real focus on human-curated playlists rather than solely algorithmic ones, something that Apple Music kept.
Yes, it did, and MOG (what Beats bought and turned into Beats Music) had something like that too. Almost none of the MOG aesthetic is left today, though.
Because Beats have the same quality that Apple products do - people who buy Beats headphones continue buying them, regardless of any other options.
I myself own several headphones from different brands, and yet Beats Studio are still my favourite ones - there's just something about that muddy, dirty bass that no other manufacturer can replicate. Even Sony's extra bass headphones with bass cranked up to +10 in EQ don't get anywhere close. For certain styles of music, they are the best headphones I own. And yeah, the hinges have broken years ago, the headband peeled off just as long ago, but they still work and sound as I like - I'd happily go and buy another pair.
Apple aims to capture the same market - people who buy AirPods Pro don't compare them with earphones from Sony or Sennheiser - they buy them because they are made by Apple and they integrate well with other Apple products. That's all.
Thank you! I don't own any, and they wouldn't go well with most of the music I listen to, but I'm glad to see someone actually defending Beats on HN.
One of the weirdest myths around audio is that it's possible to objectively rate specific speakers/headphones/etc - while there's no such objective rating for music, which is _the thing that you are playing_ on said headphones! I've listened to a number of very high end setups, and frankly for a lot of music (most pop, for example) you're better off with a pair of AirPods. Yes, with the $2000 setup you hear all the details, but did anyone ever ask if you wanted all those details? And while bass with more "oomph" might not be the most accurate, it often makes the music more fun to listen to.
In my opinion, the entire debate around audio has been focusing on completely the wrong thing: some sort of objective measure of "quality", as if it's some measure you can put a number on and simply compare A to B. Many of my favorite songs, in my experience, lose their power and emotion when listened to on an "audiophile" setup. Sometimes you don't need the details: maybe a bit of distortion and bass is a good thing. And that's just talking about the sound! Getting into the actual experience, there are a ton of non-audiophile products that provide a far superior experience. The actual sound quality of some beat-up 70s rock records and an old turntable isn't great, but the experience is lovely. And the user experience of AirPods + an Apple device is wonderful. Meanwhile the user experience of audiophile products is often (not always, but often) terrible. I've tried a couple of those portable hi-fi players and they are incredibly frustrating. And I love my Etymotics earbuds, but they have to be inserted so deep into the ear that they freak out your average Joe that tries them.
That is to say: I feel the whole audio world should stop with the obsession of some weird measure of accurate, "high quality" sound over everything else. Imagine if other things had the same obsession - people looking at art based solely on some weird measure of "picture quality" and "crispness", or buying extremely expensive, ugly, uncomfortable cars because some Internet reviewer made some graphs showing they had better "drive quality".
This debate has been around since the 60s. It used to be called "musicality."
A bit of distortion somehow helps?
Well - sometimes it does. And sometimes it doesn't. But if I'm paying >$500 for headphones I want something that is going to have low distortion, high accuracy, and musicality.
These products exist, and some of them are legendary. (Example: Nakamichi cassette decks which combined state of the art mechanical and electronic engineering with a world-leading sound.)
These headphones are very unlikely to be in that league. They're really for brand junkies who want to be seen on Instagram wearing Those Really Expensive Apple Headphones™.
I doubt most buyers are going to care about how they sound, or whether music sounds "more musical" on them.
Hmm. And what's the debate called today, then, if not musicality?
Regardless of whatever you'd like to call it, I would argue that most audiophile products do not have it. I've personally tried a ton of "audiophile" products, from your standard Massdrop DAC+IEM combo to the incredibly fancy setup of a Swiss acquaintance and was left disappointed. Sure, there's plenty of music that did sound good to me on those setups, but there was more music that sounded better on a pair of AirPods. This is also borne out by my own personal experiments. Let a random Joe listen to your expensive setup with a carefully chosen song, and they'll likely be impressed at first. Wow, the details! The range! Incredible! But let them put on their favorite song, and they'll often actually prefer it on their shitty setup. Try it - the results will surprise you.
And my critique of audiophile equipment is not coming from an untrained ear, or someone who cares about branding. I've been playing violin for almost my entire life, and even plenty of classical music sounds better on AirPods vs many audiophile setups! And as much as I like my Etymotics+DAC combo, it exposes flaws in the music. You hear the sneezes in the orchestra, you notice the small mistakes, and God help you if you play a recording of lower quality - it'll sound terrible. There is an enormous amount of music that is _only_ available in low quality, and it will sound a million times worse on your audiophile setup than your AirPods.
In my opinion, the audiophile world has completely lost its mind. Nobody cares about if the music is actually fun to listen to - they're far more concerned with frequency response curves, which, as anyone in the audiophile world knows, absolutely makes or breaks a manufacturer. Case in point: all the audiophiles downvoting the comment by 'gambiting' to oblivion, simply because they expressed their personal preference! It's preposterous to actually _like_ Beats: clearly that user is just an uninformed sheeple, downvote them and move on. I am so tired of the idea that Beats is objectively bad and Massdrop DAC+IEMs is objectively good. Has anyone ever considered that, just like the music you play with them, it's possible to have personal preferences in headphones?
You make some valid points, but FTR some of the anti-Beats sentiment relates to build quality (ie, cheap plastic and tendency to physically break at the poorly-designed, fragile hinge), and to the cost compared to alternatives with similar electronics / sound.
Yeah, but Beats Studio already do most of what AirPods Max do. I own not one, but two pair of the Beats (like ‘em enough to get the wife a pair), so I’m their “sucker” target market. Sure, maybe one can get better sound for the same money, but as you point out, other headphones don’t connect to my Apple stuff as neatly (or at all; yea, Bluetooth), yada, yada. So I’ll will sacrifice a bit of sound quality (or so the sound nutters say) for convenience.
But $550? Even this high-income Apple fanboi has his limits. At that price, the reviews better say the sound is outstanding. Because for one, Apple is competing against the Beats I already own.
I really really do, because it's not a product for people who compare brands and prices.
Like, think about it this way. Few years ago if I told any of my friends that I have a £200 pair of earphones, they would genuienly think I was crazy. Now, they all have a pair of AirPods, and no one thinks it's crazy. You know why? Because not a single one of them was in the market for a £200 pair of earphones - but they all(as apple users) were in the market for a new apple gadget. Same reason why people who would never consider spending £400 on a watch, happily bought an apple watch. There's just no comparison, no one buying an apple watch considers a £400 mechanical watch instead - it's just not competition.
So yeah, in my humble opinion - people aren't going to be comparing £500 Sennheisers or anything else to them - they will just wonder if they can justify it as a new apple gadget or not. It will be sold to people who would never otherwise in a million years consider £500 headphones.
The build quality of beats though is complete garbage. Plastic that can snap in half and then you're boned out of hundreds of dollars. These airpods will live or die based on their durability and battery life. Personally, I love my nose cancelling Sony's. They come in at a lower price point and last YEARS.
As far as I recall, Beats were using dime-a-dozen drivers. That may have changed in the interim, but people were buying them like hotcakes even when they were garbage.
And their marketing knows this, just like Apple does - their products aren't competing on price. They are competing on the image and brand recognition, and there are people(me) who genuienly like how they sound and are willing to pay the premium for all of these features.
>The difference between a $50 and $200 pair of headphones is staggering.
You fall exactly for the trap the parent is talking about. "$50 earphones" and "$200 earphones" is meaningless. There are many reasons why earphones can be more or less expensive, many of which have nothing to do with audio quality. Things like wireless support, quality of the materials used and whatever brand is embossed on it. My $50 "studio" AKG 240 are probably as good as many $200 earphones, but they're all plastic and not wireless.
I think the assumption here is that an educated consumer isn’t going to just buy any $200 piece of junk that calls itself “high end”. They are going to listen to it themselves and/or do research to figure out who is providing true value at any given price point. In that context, your $50 AKG 240’s will definitely sound 2nd rate compared to options at a higher price point (HD6xx series and a couple hundred milliwatt amp would be my favorite example at a $300 price point). I do agree that other features (wireless, vanity, etc) may factor into the decision, as I myself enjoy the decent sound provided by the AirPods Pro given their convenience.
That's true, but when op says that, I assume they don't mean any $50 headphones, they mean the best (lets go with least harmonic distortion as our arbitrary criteria for "best") ones you can get in that price range, and for the most part they are describing a trend that DOES exist to some degree in almost any category of physical good you can buy, from power tools to kitchen appliances.
Right, but that's the thing, because these products these days are often fashion statements there's less and less correlation between price and quality, especially as you go towards very expensive devices. A $50 pair of headphones is almost certainly better than a $20 one. $500 vs. $200? Maybe. $5000 vs $2000? Who the hell knows.
The point is that at $50 the AKG 240 are already the maximum audio quality you can get (in the sense reproduction). They are literally made for studio professionals to monitor recordings. Do you think non professional people need better gear to listen than what was used to record? What you are really buying above that price is build quality, comfort, or misc features.
As a counter point, Apple is bringing computation closer to ears. The Sennheiser 650 is an analog cabled experience and will accurately reflect the upstream digital to analog conversion, typically made without regard to the destination device. If Apple can use on-ear computation to make a plastic driver cone sound like a more expensive material, why would you care about the materials used?
Think for a moment about what is possible in a device as large as the Airpods Max. It could fit the guts of an Apple Watch, which can already stream audio via cell modem without a host computer (as long as you are using the Apple services).
There is simply absolutely no need for on ear computation to make low quality drivers sound better.
In ear headphones have evolved beyond plastic cones for a long time. At that price, you're competing against the very best balanced armature drivers, which basically have perfect frequency responses and harmonics, as well as against planar magnetic and the very best dynamic drivers too.
As for computing audio, yeah that's simply useless. Just have the DSP at the device. The device, iPhone, or Mac, or a PC, or whatever, is aware of which headphones it is connected to, and can trivially run the correction routines itself. In fact, this is already done by many.
In ear headphones aren't going to have enough battery to power a cellular modem.
There is simply absolutely no need for on ear computation to make low quality drivers sound better.
Sure there is. If the cost of computation for a required sound quality is lower than the difference in driver cost, then computation will win, especially when it adds additional value unavailable to the non-computational approach. Positioning the computation at the device is advantageous since it allows for a simpler data interface. For example, adjustments to the soundstage based on head movement can be performed on-device instead of making a round trip to source for the adjustment.
In ear headphones aren't going to have enough battery to power a cellular modem.
Sure, and when the first iPod was released it lacked wireless networking and was storage constrained compared to comparably priced products. I can appreciate the pragmatism and be appreciate folks working towards an exciting future.
Pardon me for departing, my kid wants to watch the SN8 livestream together; hope you enjoy some high quality Soyuz laserdisks.
Read carefully. I said there is no need for on ear computation. I personally even have impulse response profiles for my headphones that I load onto my phone and computer to make them sound much better.
For things like on ear sound stage correction, sure. That can be done. You will pay a heavy cost in sound quality, but it can be done. If your goal is sound quality, you're not going to be doing anything more that is very latency sensitive than ANC.
As for the last point, have fun with your sound streaming device that has 3 bit/s of UI bandwidth and a battery life of 1/5th that it would otherwise. It's not an issue you can fix by trying to fix it in that use case, it's an issue you fix by improving human interfaces, battery technology, and cellular technology, which is already being done. When that will be good enough for what you're describing, we can talk.
As for me, I'll enjoy having headphones with high quality and essentially unlimited battery life, and use the carefully optimized interfaces and computational power of my phone and computer to listen to music.
Sorry, but when the DAC can be tuned to the specific hardware, and the engineers know what the hell they are doing, the result can be pretty damn impressive.
This is the reason modern active bookshelf speakers like the Klipsch The Fives punch way above their weight and pull off stuff its hardware shouldn’t be capable of.
Apple can do the same thing, they have the engineers and know-how. And on top of that, the positional audio is something that requires compute power anyway.
I never argued that point. I just said that it makes no sense to make the vast majority of that processing in the headphone when your phone and computer already have specialized hardware to do it.
Also, DACs today are pretty much transparent.
For example, for positional audio and driver/amp compensation, people already do the same as Klipsch does in software on their computer. You just need a good enough microphone and then you can do it by your own using REW and EqualizerAPO, for example.
Sounds absolutely horrible. I'd rather not install some bloatware crap headphone software that injects itself into my operating system's audio stack and introduces extra latency on every device just to get the headphones to sound right.
You already have to install software that inserts itself into the audio stack and introduces extra latency to be able to use your wireless headphones. Those are called "Bluetooth drivers".
In any case, I run processing on my computer to apply a convolution filter on my audio stack with adds around 2.3ms of latency and uses 0.15% of my CPU. Compared to the ~200ms of Bluetooth latency it's completely unnoticeable, and I'm sure Apple can figure this out better than I can.
They do need some pretty wide support per individual device. A proper stack requires something like 6 different codecs, all of which are quite heavy and very different.
In any case, the transformations are not generic at all. You basically need to do one convolution, that's it. The headphones can provide the impulse response with which to convolve at pairing.
For things from Apple, of course, this is trivial.
Yes, basically Bluetooth is already almost too complicated to do well, and you would rather it were more complicated still? And like you say applying a convolution is computationally trivial especially compared to decoding a lossy audio codec and running a Bluetooth stack and antenna, which the headphones are already doing. Offloading this to the device is going to make absolutely no difference to battery life while increasing complexity and unreliability, while also restricting what processing can be done to static convolution with an impulse response. There is no reason to do this on the device.
It certainly would make a difference to battery life. Bluetooth connections as well as decoding are done in hardware using commodity chips that can't do much else. Adding additional audio processing hardware will increase the complexity of these chips which translates to higher prices and lower battery efficiency.
Remember, some of those devices have 20mA of battery. The codecs already have to be made easy to decode.
There is also absolutely no need to limiting processing to a static convolution with an impulse response. That's just the only device-specific processing you have to do. Headphones are minimum phase devices, so except for things like distortion, they can basically be described by their single impulse response.
For the rest, like spatial audio, or EQ, or anything of the sort, there is no need to do it per headphone, it's the same for all of them.
The last thing I want with my audio is some bullshit "computational experience" fucking with things and telling me what I want to hear.
Mainstream taste in audio is crap. Designing headphones for a target audience that thinks Spotify HQ mode is sufficient is not going to produce a very good product, audio-quality-wise.
Because there aren't any "natural" / "neutral" / whatever speakers / headphones / cochlear implants. They all get a signal and a task: make this sound the way the listener wants.
"Just make it sound as it did when it was (live) recorded"? That's not going to happen even assuming some "perfect" speakers (not headphones), unless you can also supply the room, audience, humidity, and appropriate level of inebriation.
Apple has done a lot of of work on adjusting AirPods to your head and ear, IIRC. That's all software, and exactly the sort of thing they've been good at, even in the last few years.
It's basically iPhone camera vs. Canon & Nikon, the sequel. How many times did people on HN insist phone cameras will never be as good as SLRs, because the latter have the five pound of glass it takes to create good photos?
Turns out software and sensors are a pretty good substitute. While some features of good lenses are still not quite there (bokeh), they've eviscerated them in other, arguably more important disciplines (low light).
Phone cameras still aren't as good as SLRs, and never will be due to sensor size and optics.
Apple could have made these as good as $500 Sennheiser/Grado/Sony cans. But they didn't.
Rants about "traveling with an orchestra" don't even make sense when one listens to music produced exclusively in-the-box. And even if I am listening to recorded material what is wrong with nuance and detail... after all that is what the mixing and mastering engineers heard when they made it. Do you think they choose their microphones and recording hardware willy-nilly?
Software is a terrible substitute for hardware! Hardware is easier to understand, latency-free, and produces a more harmonically interesting result
Yeah man, you live in a different world from 95% of consumers. For typical users the iPhone camera will destroy what they could do with an SLR.
You remind me of a buddy of mine that has hearing loss from the marines. He is a giant headphone nut, and owns numerous $500+ pairs of headphones. All sorts of head phone amplifiers and dacs. But his hearing loss prevents any of that from really even mattering.
Does it? Or are you just saying that? You can't experience hearing through his ears, so how can you possibly say that?
Hearing loss is a weird beast that takes many forms. If he truly cannot tell the difference between Beats and his setup in a blind hearing test then maybe I would agree. Do you know if he's done this?
He's talking about the computation involved in turning any digital sound into the analog one needed for a speaker. If there's no cable between the digital-to-analog conversion chip and the analog speaker, there's no chance for cable characteristics to have an impact on the sound.
I think you're taking about audio pre-processing stuff that Spotify or others do to qualitatively ""enhance"" audio for their lowest common denominator listeners, which is completely independent from what's being discussed.
The wording implies there is at least some level of extra DSP going on (talk of "dynamic EQ" or whatever notwithstanding). Calling a digital-to-analog converter a "computational experience" seems beyond the pale, even for Apple PR hacks
> Mainstream taste in audio is crap. Designing headphones for a target audience that thinks Spotify HQ mode is sufficient is not going to produce a very good product, audio-quality-wise.
Mainsteam taste is what sells products. Obviously you're not part of the target market and should probably just move on.
It's not bad but neither is it good. The compression still butchers a lot of sound. It's easy to tell when compared against the original CDs or FLAC backups for certain kinds of music
Spotify high quality is 320 kps, if I remember correctly. This should be indistinguishable from lossless unless something is weird with the track.
I've done A/B testing with decent headphones (http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html) and not been able to tell the difference. Maybe you can, but I'd bet that most people can't, and in any case the result is far from butchery.
320 kbps mp3 is already indistinguishable for most people with most workloads, let alone the much more performant 320 kbps Vorbis that Spotify uses.
A lot of people love to fret about this stuff and convince themselves they can tell for the exact same reasons uninformed people go out and buy $200 cables.
It's also the same as people who install Gentoo so they can tune their CFLAGS to be 0.0000001% faster under certain workloads at the cost of not running on any other machine and crashing inexplicably on occasion.
We all love optimizing things, regardless of the actual real-world benefits.
I will have to listen more closely, though last I remember it was like 256kbps.
I've mostly noticed differences in lower frequencies seeming attenuated in electronic bass music, though it is possible that this might be due to mastering (for stream vs CD) or normalization
Apple could use their position of product leadership to introduce mainstream consumers to a higher standard of fidelity if they wanted to, particularly at this price. But I guess that would cut into their Beats business and would make Apple Music look worse than it already is, and surely the profits aren't as nice as using plastic(!) drivers
You can get Sennheiser HD280's, where the audio quality is likely worlds apart from these, and earcup padding that attenuates outside noise by something like 30db passively, for $60. Or you could be a doof and buy these Apple cans
> A $400 Sennheiser 650 will no doubt blow them away while still being $150 cheaper.
Of course they will. But it's not fair to compare open backs with closed backs without a huge asterisk [0]
> If you want the best sound quality for the buck, you usually need to go with open-backed (or simply “open”) headphones. The open (but uncomfortable) SR60 is probably the best value in the business, followed by the awesome DT-880, which is far better than everything in this review in both comfort and sound quality. But open headphones are like screen doors: they let all exterior noise in, and more importantly, they let all of your music out. This will annoy anyone around you, so it’s extremely inconsiderate to use open headphones in buses, trains, airplanes, shared offices, or anywhere else near other people, and it’s irresponsible to recommend them without this huge warning.
Serious question. If open headphones (which I've never used) let everyone else hear what you're listening to, why would anybody ever use them? Isn't it better just to have decent speakers and not use headphones at all?
Not everyone has the space for a decent speaker setup. An open back pair of headphones will work anywhere as long as the environment isn't too loud. Another reason could be if you are living in an apartment with neighbors who won't be very happy with your speaker setup blasting sound through the walls into their apartment. Open back headphones do leak sound but in a much more localized area. Also, you can get a great pair of open back headphones for $200 or less and then with a $50-$100 amp have amazing sound. I haven't looked closely into speaker setups but I feel like a good speaker setup is going to cost more than that.
By an order of magnitude or two, yeah. In addition to the very pricey speakers and receiver, you also, at that point, need fine control over room shape and acoustics, as well as more space than any apartment is likely to provide, in order to get the benefit of what you're paying for. Headphones are a much more controlled and thus easily engineered environment, so it's a lot cheaper and easier to get equivalent quality, albeit with a necessarily narrower soundstage in almost all cases.
The $450 I paid for my endgame headphone/amp/DAC wouldn't even get you in the door of an audiophile speaker place.
Haha fair enough. I ran an HD 6XX with a Jotunheim for a while, but ended up preferring a pair of JBL LSR305s with an SVS sub a lot more.
I think the main reasons were being able to experience the sub frequencies with my entire body (they're too big to fit in your ears!), and share the experience with my friends.
I actually compared my Sony MDR7506 with my Anker Soundcore Motion+ this morning and the Soundcore blew away the Sonys to my ear. Yes, the Soundcore is an unrepairable bluetooth speaker, but they both cost ~$80
At any sane price point, headphones blow away speakers.
It's hard and expensive to move a lot of air precisely, and speakers are influenced by room acoustics. $5 headphones beat $50 speakers. $80 headphones beat $200 speakers. And $200 headphones beat $400 speakers.
I can't afford to find out beyond that, but I suspect things get more nuanced on the ultra-high-end.
For me, for music, I'm happy with something like a Sony MDRV6 studio monitor, which sells for under $100. I don't know of speakers I like under $200.
Headphones are also nice for teleconferencing, where speakers aren't.
While not telling which way is superior sounds produced by the speakers are also felt by your whole body even if subtle. That makes for a noticeably different listening experience.
I think the comparison is far more drastic than that. I would compare $100 headphones (like your Sonys) to amplifier speaker set up of at least $2000. That depth of bass response and accuracy is quite an achievement for speakers.
I say this as someone with both Sony MDRV6 headphones and a home borderline audiophile stereo setup retailing for over $3k.
This is anecdotal and I mentioned this somewhere else in this thread, but I did a quick shootout between my Sony MDR7506 and a $80 Soundcore Motion+ bluetooth speaker and the Soundcore actually blew the 7506 away.
TBF I was powering the headphones with just my Pixel 3, but it's not a particularly hard to drive headphone.
There's been quite a bit of advancement recently with bluetooth speakers, and we'll probably see some more disruption in the affordable hi-fi space soon with what Purifi is doing with Class D amps.
... I'm not so sure about that. I suspect you might have liked the way the speaker changed the sound, but you could have gotten the same effect (with greater control) with the headphones and digital preprocessing.
The headphones will give a more faithful reproduction of the original recording.
Making a nearly-perfect class D amp isn't hard (which is not to say a lot of people haven't messed it up; there are a lot of pretty bad amps out there).
The hard part is the speaker itself. The mechanicals of moving a lot of air accurately are hard. You need a physically large woofer which moves over a long distance. If you do that, your woofer and tweater won't be in the same place, so your phase response will be wonky. You don't want the air cavity acting as a spring overpowering your driver, so you need a large box. Etc. By the end of it, it's super-complex. Headphones are super-easy in comparison.
While everybody can hear, they won't hear it anywhere near as loud. So you can listen to music as loud as you want without disturbing your neighbors or even the people in the next room.
Secondly, you arguably get more bang for your buck. For a budget of say $300-400 split between open headphones and a DAC you'll get much better sound quality than similar money spent on speakers and an amp. Finally to get the most out of speakers you need space to set them up correctly and a room with decent acoustics. Headphones avoid all of that.
That "everyone else" hearing may include other people close by in the same room, not from other rooms or other apartments. In addition, getting the same audio quality from speakers costs a multiple of the price of a high-end headphone pair, and even then it's very difficult (think room reveb and positioning).
Sennheiser HD650 + an empirically incredible amp and dac will run you between 1 and 2 grand. For speakers multiply that by 10 at least. And they still won't sound as clear and intimate as something pressed up against your head.
And also open backs just bleed noise, they don't shake the room, so unless someone is next to you they aren't gonna hear anything anyways.
I put together a ~$3k system recently that has blown away any headphone experience I've had [0] [1] [2].
I guess for me, the experience goes beyond just what the music sounds like. Being able to dance without having to worry about anything falling off of my head or out of my ears, and being able to share the experience with my girlfriend and others effectively multiplies the joy I get by an order of magnitude.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I love speakers, and I adore filling a room with noise, I just think headphones make more sense to someone interested in getting more depth and clarity out of their music.
Edit: For their dollar that is. With unlimited money I would probably take speakers.
Headphones don’t require a treated room to sound excellent. Speakers will engage the natural acoustics of whatever space they live in and comb filtering will result. Almost always a great pair of headphones will beat a great pair of speakers in a listening test.
It lets everyone hears but the sound is not that loud, e.g. manageable even in a room with bad sound insulation. Beside, a comparable speaker setup in term of sound quality takes a lot of space and cost a lot more which may not be desirable.
Totally valid point. In most cases, I think the layman will generally find an equivalently priced speaker setup over $600 sounds better.
Reasons that I can think that someone might still go with open backs are:
• Portability - You can move around your house or go running without leaving the music.
• Less dependent of environment - they basically sound the same in a small, big, or acoustically reflective rooms.
• Leak less sound than speakers - you can blast music without waking up your kids or downstairs neighbors.
• Better high frequency reproduction - whereas full sound systems will generally do better with lower.
EDIT: Added price stipulation to where speakers start to sound better. Agreed that if you're not willing to spend much and want to listen alone, headphones are the better choice.
With headphones, I can still hear my music at a loud volume with high quality while the noise outside of my home office is none. The only time someone would be affected would be if they walked into my home office.
If I set my speakers to the same volume level, it'll disturb most nearby rooms in the house.
I have $4,000 audio setup (Sennheiser HDV820 + Sennheiser HD800) and honestly a $500 Sennheiser HD650 plugged directly to a 3.5mm adapter sounds way more fun in everyday use. The exponential quality curve only goes up to certain point and beyond that it's all about the sound characteristic (HD800/S is good for classical/jazz) and how much the manufacturer is going charge for it.
That being said, I still use AirPods Pro a lot more than both HD800 and HD650 due to convenience of using it even though the sound quality is way worse. Fidelity isn't really much of a concern when I'm doing something else with background music.
Have another look at that internals picture (which is a render so take it with a grain of salt), they appear to be using an extremely unconventional arrangement of a rigid cone driven by two linear motors mounted at 45 degree angles to the driver axis.
A rigid cone is challenging but a goal in many high-priced designs (less so for headphones but definitely in speaker drivers with say carbon fibre drivers).
Dual actuators mounted like that could be interesting for spatial audio and may also be used to overcome some of the challenges with suspending rigid driver cones.
In other words it should be interesting to see the reviews...
Beats by Dre sell incredibly well in large part because they are a fashion statement. They also have cranked bass, which aggravates people who want accurate response but sounds great to people who put them on in a shop and hear "wow, this one sounds different".
Apple products have long been sold as fashion and status symbols alongside their tech specs. Then they add the ease of integration into their ecosystem. Is that really the same as being "outperformed"?
I grew up listening to music on $20 dollar earphones (taking into account inflation). In later life I've upped my limit to around $80. I thought that was extravagant.
I'm never going to come to grips with the concept of $500 headphones. It just seems insane.
A few years ago I bought a pair of Hifiman HE400i headphones for around $300 (they’re less than $200 now I think). These are wired, open-backed and have planar drivers. Going from a pair of $100 headphones to these was like night and day. I’m not an audiophile by any stretch, but wow is there a big difference. If you enjoy music, and are in a position to use open-back headphones, I’d highly recommend trying something like them in the ~$200 range. With proper care they should last many years.
I have a pair of HE-400 headphones that I love - the sound quality is outstanding. But dang if they aren’t the heaviest and least comfortable things around (Compare to something like a nice pair of those seinheisers that everybody owns - those feel like you’re wearing a cloud and still sound 85% as good). To me the HE400s are very much “special occasions” headphones that I bust out for when I’m really sitting down to just listen to music. For everything else I need something a bit more... usable.
It's one of those things where you don't know what you're missing until you know what you're missing. If I'd never tried a pair of HD 598s, I'd have stayed satisfied with $50 whatever. If I'd never tried a pair of HD 650s, I'd have stayed satisfied with HD 598s.
TBF, until I spent what I considered 'proper' money ($200+) on headphones I didn't really 'get it'. But the difference my first 'proper' pair of headphones made to listening to music, I'm not sure I'd ever be happy going back.
TB equally F, by the time you have headphones, amp, and DAC, you'll be pretty close to that price anyway. HD 6XX + Magni/Modi is about the most cost-effective you can get, and with shipping you're looking at about $450 all told. Worth it for sure, but it's pretty rare when you get into this kind of stuff that you're just paying for headphones.
(That said, an HD 598 or whatever replaced it in Sennheiser's line is a great intro - the quality of reproduction is very much in the same ballpark, and you don't need specialized equipment to drive it. Considerably cheaper, too.)
> I'm never going to come to grips with the concept of $500 headphones. It just seems insane.
In the 90s, when high-end audio in cars was really first ramping up, I read an article which made what I consider a salient point: people buying an executive-type car with a high-end audio system built in would happily spend a fortune on a stereo for the house that they might listen to for a few hours a week, and then drop pennies (by comparison) on car audio that they could easily spend far more time with. From that perspective, the move into high-end car audio made perfect sense.
I see headphones in the same light; if you like listening to music, and your tastes run to music where the quality of reproduction will significantly be improved by spending more on your headphones, it's a much more rational spend to upgrade your headphones - which you use for hours a day - than your home audio.
Your Sennheiser examples are wired headphones which are (essentially) unpowered speakers.
The Apple one is technically a lot more complex with a good bluetooth chip (especially compared to the rest of the bluetooth offerings), some digital signal processing to make the 'simple' speakers sound better, a battery (+charging circuit) for 20 hours of wireless playback and a gyroscope to adjust the sound stage to your movement (and gives a decent Atmosphere representation).
I presume a big part of the price of these high-tech cans is contributed by research and software development, not by materials...
The price is steep as is the apple way, but I agree that saying "EGAD How can they charge as much as HD6-whatevers" when those headphones basically require an external amp just to run is just a little silly.
No there isn't. The audiophile culture could be replaced with a form where you type how much money you have and it gives you the equipment that you are supposed to buy but this is not because of the costs but because the industry taught the market that it must be that way. Often, the difference of sound quality between high end and low end headphones comes from tiny bit of foam.
It's really about branding and market segmentation.
If you're not hearing the difference between 200$ headphones and 50$ ones or even 500$ vs 200$ and think it's foam then there's something wrong with your hearing. Like the parent said the differences get more subtle as you go up the range and at some point it becomes bullshit (gold HDMI cable stuff)
I think the problem is that the music I listen to is mastered so poorly (compression wars) that the more expensive headphones just expose how bad the music sounds rather than make it sound better. Maybe if I changed my taste to enjoy classical music instead of J-pop.
I have a similar problem - I use studio headphones at home mostly but popular music actually sounds worse without EQ. Listening to podcasts however is almost like being in the studio.
I can hear the difference between $200 and $500, but I'm not sure I would say that the $500 sounds better -- or just different. I suspect I'm not alone. But its up to each person to find the right price point for their ears.
I had an interesting experience along these lines. I was in a headphone shop because my old $200 Seinnheiser headphones had fallen apart after many years of use.
I got to compare many different headphones from different manufacturers back-to-back, using my own music that I was familiar with.
Under $200 = garbage.
$200 - $500 = generally good and largely indistinguishable apart from the comfort of the headband and the padding.
I was about to buy a pair of HD600 headphones when for a lark I decided to try the "out of my budget" HD800 headphones. They were $1,500 at the time.
It was like night & day. I couldn't believe it. All other headphones rendered the sound of a double bass in a classical piece as a monotonal "thrum-thrum-thrum". With the HD800 it was like you were standing next to the thing. Every note, even the lowest, clearly distinct. You could hear the scrape of the bow across the strings. In orchestral pieces you could hear every intake of breath and every ruffled page.
Head drooping in defeat, I handed over my credit card and bought it right there. I was ruined. There is no going back.
I ended up re-listening to my entire music collection and re-watching every movie that had decent sound mastering. Some songs made the hair stand up on my arms, they gave me a sense of tingly pleasure they never had before.
It's funny, sometimes better reproduction quality ruins the experience - for example I rewatched some sci-fi movies on my 4K TV in full resolution and the extra detail just brings attention to flaws in effects, it shifts the experience from people in a magical place to actors in front of a green screen.
But everything is objectively better and the experience is better in 95% of the cases.
Likewise for music. When I listen to some music on my studio headphones I get precise sound and more detail, but in the end some music sounds worse than on cheap but loud bass heavy headphones.
But is the higher price necessary or an artificial segmentation of the market? Of course expensive sounds better than cheap, but could $100 headphones sound as good as $500 or are they really that much more expensive to make?
I doubt it - there is plenty of competition in that market. I bought some "no-name" chinese open ears for 50$ with supposedly good drivers - had decent reviews saying they sound above their price - you just needed to replace the horrible ear pads they were decent. But for example my 200$ DT990 are obviously a class above.
The experience is a little like that of photography, I've found. Starting out, you can spend substantial but reasonable amounts for very significant increments in image quality. After a while you hit an inflection point beyond which you'd be spending effectively unbounded amounts in search of just that little extra bit of sharpness or depth of field or so on. The people with the money and urge to climb that curve are very like "serious audiophiles" in my experience, but there's still a range in which you can spend and see a real difference.
My 105mm macro and flash kit cost about a grand, and let me take pictures of hunting wasps from six inches away - something I couldn't do without them. Likewise, the headphones I use let me hear things I otherwise wouldn't. You can get stupid with money for sure in this space, but that doesn't make everything in this space stupid.
When it comes to high-end speaker/headphones drivers, plastic and/or paper are the preferred materials. Metal is not inherently superior in this application. It is different, not better. Stiffer materials are more resistant to cone breakup but that is not really an issue in tiny headphone drivers. Some headphone makers probably choose metal drivers for marketing reasons, because (as we see on this thread) consumers understandably think that metal is better than plastic.
$100 Sennheiser HD 280 pros. A $400 Sennheiser 650
will no doubt blow them away
Sure, lets look at the 650's objective performance.
A +6dB hump at 5khz, followed by a (checks notes) -12dB (!!!) dip between there and 10khz.
You may enjoy that sound, but it is (in a literal sense) not high fidelity. Above 4khz those Sennheisers do random things to the frequency response that an individual may or may not find enjoyable. And above 7khz it starts to become a simulation of high frequency hearing loss. I would probably enjoy it, because my old ears aren't great in the treble region.
More to the point, we're comparing active DSP EQ'd headphones (the Apples) to a bunch of passive models. Physical construction of the drivers becomes less relevant when you can use onboard EQ to bend the frequency response however you like, and you don't have to worry about making your headphones' impedance curve work with a ridiculous array of amplifiers because it is mated to a known onboard amplifier.
Now, I'm not claiming that the AirPods Max will be headphones to buy. I really don't like the sound of Bluetooth headphones in general, with the caveat that I haven't heard Sony's near-lossless LDAP codec. But these seem like a reasonable value proposition if you want wireless and a bunch of Apple-specific convenience features and you're in the market to drop a few hundred on some headphones that you might use for several thousand hours.
The defining featre of an "exponential" curve is that there is no "bend". The bend is an illusion create by arbitrarily imposed scale. What there is, "quality that matters to to you" and "price you can afford", and you should ignore the part of the curve with too-high price and too-low quality.
Hmm. Don't see that. The defining feature of an exponential is that there is a bend everywhere.
A linear plot has no bend.
As long as my y axis is linear, I can always see a bend in the exponential curve no matter what scale I use on the left, provided you have the correct x axis limits to visualize the bend.
As far as only paying attention to quality that we personally value and is affordable, I agree.
The point is a “bend” implies a spot like an elbow, where suddenly diminishing returns kick in. Exponential growth is a clean curve with no such spots. Move x units right, you’ll always get a y% boost.
That's true of a ton of things in audio, video, and lots of other things. Pros and enthusiasts spend thousands on gear that makes a tiny difference in experience, output quality, etc. It makes sense in some situations. But a lot of people who have the money also just overspend.
I’m curious of what is the quantifiable difference between those price brackets. It’s especially confusing to me how people are buying in ear headphones and spending hundreds of dollars and somehow getting a better sound than $50 ones.
Both AirPods that have been released have already been wayyyyy better than every “established” earbud product in their price category. Don’t see why you would assume that AirPods Max would all of a sudden be worse.
What is the difference you are noticing? What is the performance you are talking about? It's the exact problem the parent is talking about, people have no idea so they talk about price.
Maybe it's lighter than the alternative? Not everyone wants to wear a brick on their head.
But just the word "plastic" doesn't really give any useful information. With all of the different formulations of plastics out there, the physical properties span an extremely wide range.
Source: I work in the polymers/materials industry.
Thanks for saying this. None of the people here have even tried the headphones yet, don’t know what they are made of, and don’t know how computational audio plays with material..
I own a pair of midrange Dali speakers which use compressed paper cones and sound really great.
You need some material which is rigid enough to push the sound waves in the air, but light enough it can be pushed to high frequencies. If plastic works, why not?
You are paying more for the design and user experience with Apple. Sure, there is always something better though I doubt many listen to music that is of sufficient enough quality via their devices to hear the difference or had a really good pair to compare it to. Beats headphones proved that audio quality is not always what moves the market.
How does apple becomes your hero when they are selling the same thing ?
> deeply troubling subculture where passionately debating about very expensive cables and gadgets without ever being able to pass a blind test on the claims is the norm, almost like cargo cult
That sounds like the apple cult.
> quickly pushing you on the money-spend-for-audio-performance scale where you are simply supposed to check you bank account
We are talking about $549 earphones from apple here.
>How does apple becomes your hero when they are selling the same thing ?
They sell the product experience. Easily connects, looks nice and sounds nice. Every now and then they would throw some audiphileish numbers in the product description(like it updates 3 gazillion times per second) but it's never the central argument.
Apple products are always about the experience and they wouldn't hesitate to put higher end specs when matter and lower end specs when it doesn't and make nerds uncomfortable or even angry because it would miss-match their convention of GB per USD or Herz per Euro. This is the way it always was, most famously with iPhone where Apple doesn't disclose RAM or CPU frequency or battery capacity and all-knowing reviewers will angrily tell you that Apple sells 1000$ phone with 4GB of RAM and how ridiculous is this compared to, say Samsung where you get 12GB RAM for the same price.
By experience, I mean the experience you get from using the product, I don't mean the money spending experience. Audiophile industry definitely provides you the spending experience but that's not what I expect from products.
You must be more than average rich if buying apple products does not give you a "money spending experience".
Product experience is, debatable, having used at least one product, I can "imagine" how they can improve it.
While at the same time, having duped by the audiophile industry as well, the product was also great (i got those shure headphones).
What I am saying is sure there is no denying of experience wise of both spending/product, there is definitely a gap in the cost and worth of the product.
> By experience, I mean the experience you get from using the product, I don't mean the money spending experience. Audiophile industry definitely provides you the spending experience but taht's not what I expect from products.
Man, its painful on my eyes to even read stuff like that, how you contradict yourself within few lines. It would help to have some rational discussion about pros and cons, but you undermine the pro-Apple side pretty badly.
In this case Apple isn't doing anything magical or novel, there are similar products on the market for 1/4 of the price, looking better, possibly even sounding better. But sure go ahead and buy them, there are tons of folks buying 'quality' like Bose, Beats or similar.
I'll keep my cable plugged for my Sennheisers, but my main criteria is sound quality.
> deeply troubling subculture where passionately debating about very expensive cables and gadgets without ever being able to pass a blind test on the claims is the norm, almost like cargo cult
> That sounds like the apple cult.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, but this statement on its face is absurd. The equivalent comparison to "without ever being able to pass a blind test" would be running macOS on a computer where you've hidden the Apple logo, and seeing if people can tell whether it's Windows.
You may have valid problems with Apple's users, but you haven't provided any evidence that it has anything in common with audiophile culture, and the comparison makes no sense on its face as described by the parent comment.
"pass a blind test" wasn't my choice of words, I would rather put it like something similar to "no one was fired for buying from ibm" on a personal level.
> You may have valid problems with Apple's users
I don't have a problem with apple users. I use apple products too. I also understand the rush of spending. I just don't understand how users see apple as a Hero/God company (blind trust). For evidence see parent comment.
Got it, yeah having a problem with Apple users who "see apple as a Hero/God company (blind trust)" is fair and valid.
(Your initial comment "that sounds like the apple cult" is after quoting a different portion of the parent comment that's talking about a different aspect of audiophile culture that doesn't have any obvious similarities to Apple users, hence the confusion.)
> How does apple becomes your hero when they are selling the same thing ?
Because he values image over substance, and his personal identity is tied to Apple.
One thing about my Grado, Audeze, etc. I can repair them. I've had the same pairs for years, used day in and out, and when I wear them out I can buy new parts and easily fix them. I don't need to go to a "Genius" or have to spudge them apart and not have them ever fit right again.
> Because he values image over substance, and his personal identity is tied to Apple.
This is a great example from yesterdays conversation where anti-apple people are more passionate with their hate than apple fans with their love.
If I had $500 laying around and I wanted a pair of over ear headphones these would be on my shortlist. Not because of image, but without trying them I can say they probably sound great, and will pair/move between my Apple devices with ease. The w1 chip is a game changer if you have multiple apple devices.
Oh c'mon. Apple products tend to be long lasting, are incredibly easy to use, don't malfunction, have a good design aesthetic and are a good addition to an already existing suite of Apple products. Suggesting that he values image over substance seems unnecessary.
What I meant was the rate at which they malfunction seems to be lower than Sony/Senheiser counterparts. Admittedly this is purely anecdotal with the sample size being about 20 people.
With the exception of an ipod touch I have never bought an Apple product, however I definitely appreciate them. I was simply trying to push back on the "image over substance" comment.
As someone with the same issue (including multiple replacements).. I don't want a refund. I just want working ones. I really wish they'd fix whatever manufacturing defect is causing this.
It's frustrating. My airpods pro had an issue where they'd make a crackling sound with every step I take (but were fine when sitting). Apple replaced them in warranty and it's been fine since, but they now have a replacement program for these out of warranty as well.
I hope they're doing diagnostics on defective airpods they receive from customers.
Endlessly fucking around with your equipment, priding yourself on replacing a $20 extended warranty with a $40 soldering iron, two hours of your time, and three deep breaths of mercury is just as much an "identity" as enjoying Apple products.
And considering the total numbers doing either of these two things, I believe the tinkerers have far more need to tell everyone about it than the "fanboys".
Wait, are you talking about de-soldering with mercury? That sounds...uncommon and ill-advised.
I've seen a brand mercury that makes electronics products(?), but doesn't seem to quite fit the context.
I mean, a soldering iron isn't exactly disposable. I can see how the audiophile crowd could grind gears. But while fiddling around with something can certainly be more trouble than it's worth, basically repair shaming seems like a bizarre take. At that point it's as much an electronics hobby.
In the bad old days of computers, there were certainly more problems you had to solve with an iron. Hell, if you've had a busted cap on a gpu or mobo past warranty, there's still problems that do.
I don't know, I just find it difficult, that on this kind of software-dev focused forum, that I can discourage the hacker spirit anywhere it grows.
You're assuming a lot about the person you're talking about.
Some people will probably buy these for the image, some because they work well with Apple products, some because ??. But you don't know what he values or who he is personally. Why be so toxic?
Be careful not to equate pro audio equipment with “overpaying audiophile” gear. Spending $500+ on headphones is common for engineers and musicians alike (typically custom fitted IEMs).
Studios and professionals spend large sums on demonstrably better equipment. You won’t find many who identify as “audiophiles” in the “$1000 optical cable” definition of the word.
AirPods Max are headphones lacking a headphone port. They will not be used by audio professionals. Latency is avoided at all costs in studio, on stage.
Apple’s new headphones are a fashion statement. To some, wearing a new release conveys status. You know how much it costs and they own it. The price of a Porsche might appall you too.
I'm not an audio engineer or a musician but I got custom IEMs and they were a great decision for me. My ears don't work with the majority of in-ear style audio devices out there for some reason-- my left ear is fine but everything falls out of my right.
Back when I flew a lot, I could have my IEMs in but not listening to anything and I could barely hear the engines. There was a crying baby behind me and I didn't know until I took them out (while listening to music almost as quietly as my phone would go).
It goes without saying, but they're also incredibly comfortable too.
Thank you I did not realize this. If the adaptive EQ can be disabled I suppose they could work in a pro setting, but likely in the mastering context of “I wonder what this mix will sound like on high end consumer headphones”
Former mastering engineer here. Discussing audio gear in any open online forum is pretty hopeless. Any conversation will eventually be dominated by people who misunderstand (often willfully) the human perceptual mechanism and its propensity for illusion.
It's possible to talk about effects on the edge of perception: the protocols for the tests by which perceptual codecs are assessed and incrementally improved had to be designed somehow. But you basically cannot have such conversations unless every participant accepts their own fallibility and blind testing as the price of admission, which is only going to happen with a closed group.
I always find the audiophile market to be borderline
fraud. They sell CD demagnetisers, ceramic cable lifters
and all sorts of items that don't make any sense whatsoever.
I, too, find that stuff abhorrent.
The good news is that many, if not most audiophiles do as well. There are a lot of objectivity-minded audiophiles who reject that snake oil stuff with a passion.
The fact is that basic audio reproduction -- which is essentially just signal reproduction -- is engineering, not art, and has been pretty much worked out for decades. We know what sounds good and we know how to make it happen. Long story short: reproducing the signal as accurately as possible, with a slight shift to emphasize bass frequencies (Google "Harman Curve") is what sounds good. Floyd Toole and Sean Olive are names to research if you want to know more.
As an example of grass-roots efforts in support of objective audiophile-dom, one example would be this guy's site, full of detailed measurements of various gear: http://audiosciencereview.com
The perception of audiophiles has become a bit wacky over the years. Essentially, in the 70s/80s/90s, the stereo magazines became dependent on advertising from snake oil purveyors, and therefore weren't really free to decry that stuff. And then the media tends to focus on the really wacky fraud crap like CD demagnetizers and the like. That stuff exists, but that is the lunatic fringe and the rest of us laugh at it.
I dunno about fraud but it does occasionally have similarities to drug usage imo in that you can become aware of certain highs and then wind up endlessly chasing new levels of greatness.
I remember the first few albums I listened to on what I then considered HIGH quality headphones (Koss PortaPros and ATH-M50s) and it was mindblowing how much better some albums sounded, how much better they felt. It creates an itch that people with disposable income will want to scratch, then once you move into bluetooth you're adding all kinds of connection issues to consider too.
The Porta Pros are still amazing headphones. Lifetime warranty, cheap, and great sound. They work perfect for exercising, if you're willing to put up with the cable
I loved my Porta Pros. They sound fantastic and they’re so cheap. The problem was that they broke a lot (thank goodness for that lifetime warranty). After third or fourth time sending them back I decided I wanted something more reliable.
You get what you pay for, I guess, but man. Best worst headphones I’ve ever had.
I've never had a pair break, just had to replace the pads as they wore out after a couple of years. I don't think I've been _particularly_ careful with them, but I definitely don't toss them into my backpack or anything like that?
I'm a somewhat clumsy person, so I'm willing to accept some of the blame here :) I had a pair of Grados that I didn't like quite as much, my next job gave me a pair of Beats for free, then I got a pair of AirPods and then upgraded to the AirPods Pro. I will not be purchasing the AirPods Max.
So far the AirPods Pro have been the best combo of convenience, build quality and sound quality for me. But I still think about those Porta Pros.
I've been eyeballing the AirPods Pro as well! I had a coworker who was using a pair for video conferencing, and recommended them at first - but eventually became repeatedly inconvenienced by the battery running out and having to change to a wired set.
Not sure if the problem could have been solved with more consistent charging - but it convinced me to stick with wired WFH drivers for now.
I'd still consider getting a pair for running if it wasn't for my environmental concerns wrt the rattling problems.
Ah yes, the included mic is very useful for videoconferencing. The battery only really runs out for me if I'm on calls for multiple hours without recharges, or if I forget to charge the case.
> "you actually pay for the product experience instead for being part of some deeply troubling subculture"
I appreciate your larger argument but this statement is ironic in light of your previous paragraph :/.
IME (with time as an Apple software engineer) the Apple subculture _is_ a deeply troubling subculture. Take the iPhone for example: small, insignificant iterations that demand a premium. Consider the litany of software flaws that line BigSur and Catalina? What is the end consumer truly gaining with this new iteration? Would you respond "product experience"? Yet Apple appears to be doing well YoY with their returns on these products.
I'm particularly fond of your phrasing though: "cargo cult". Again, ironically applicable to Apple.
What I like about Apple fanboy subculture is that it's generally positive. Apple fans can get smirky when discussing Apple but would't chase down and brigate, turning every discussion about competitors into "We are smart Apple elites but good for you for trying". Competitor hateboys are not common among Apple fanboys.
On the other hand they would be always targeted by people who are not in the Apple ecosystem, usually called sheep and explained how they are supposed to not be happy with the product they bought.
For me, Apple is the company that cares about experience design as primary concern and that's why I care about what they are doing. It's intellectually stimulating, much more than chasing the random metric that somehow everyone decided that it's the number to look for.
For example, lately everyone would talk about bezel to screen ratio. Previously it was Ghz, Megapxels, core numbers and what not.
There might not be as many hateboys, but what I have found is that Apple fanboys are significantly more defensive, and often respond poorly to criticism, and are generally at best dismissive of it. This is probably a result of being so frequently accosted by said hateboys, but it makes nuanced discussion outside of the bounds of marketing copy difficult. Then again, rarely do fanboys make it easy...
> Apple is my hero in that regard, where you actually pay for the product experience instead for being part of some deeply troubling subculture where passionately debating about very expensive cables and gadgets without ever being able to pass a blind test on the claims is the norm, almost like cargo cult.
I would say there are two types of audiophile communities:
1. The sort that’s just looking to show off or is completely obsessed, without paying much regard to the enjoyment of the audio itself.
2. The sort that just wants to enjoy music.
The communities that fall into category #2 are great. They’ll give advice such as:
- Don’t waste money on X when you could buy Y for a fraction of the price. You’re unlikely to notice a difference.
- No, humans can’t differentiate between properly-encoded MP3 320 and lossless. It’s physically impossible, and I’ll show you how to conduct a double-blind test to prove it.
- Yes, X is better than Y, but it’s also a lot more expensive. Start with Y; if you’re really not satisfied, you can upgrade, but chances are Y is good enough.
- Why on earth would you buy that cable? Just get some cheap crap from Amazon. It’s a digital signal anyway.
- Balanced analog signals don’t benefit from expensive cables.
- Unbalanced analog signals don’t benefit from snake oil, which includes pretty much any cable over 20 bucks.
- If you’re enjoying your music, don’t mess with it. Stop trying to impress people.
- No, those $500 Apple headphones aren’t going to help you as an artistic professional—you need reference speakers, which those definitely are not. They’re designed to make even the crappiest audio sound like unicorn farts.
- Are you regularly flying first class and need something to dampen the screams of children? Get whatever makes you happy, but $500 is probably excessive.
>Apple is my hero in that regard, where you actually pay for the product experience instead for being part of some deeply troubling subculture where passionately debating about very expensive cables and gadgets without ever being able to pass a blind test on the claims is the norm, almost like cargo cult.
The lack of self-perception here is astonishing.
FYI, for those of us outside of the cult-of-Apple who watch how Apple sells phones with a bill of materials of $300 for $900+ to people who see them as a status symbol and a community of high-end influencers, we view Apple exactly as you describe here
The way you describe Apple as "selling an EXPERIENCE" instead of selling headphones perfectly demonstrates how the Apple cult transcends a product market and speaks emotionally to the Apple cult. You aren't buying headphones, you're buying into the Apple Experience(TM).
And finally I want to take a small laugh at the fact that you describe "THEM" as a creepy subculture and cargo cult, while in the same breath calling the Apple corporation "Your Hero"!! Cargo Cult is a great way to describe how we view you and your hero Apple.
At or below around $1k, price is a decent proxy for sound quality in headphones if you stay away from the trashy consumer stuff e.g. Beats, Raycons. Audiophile snake oil crap (e.g. ionic crystal cable risers, brass pyramids, $10k USB cables) isn’t really part of the same market.
High quality wireless headphones tend to come with a price premium and sound not quite as good, which seems fair since they are generally closed-back and have to drive a DAC and amp off a relatively small battery. At $549 these had better sound really good but I wouldn’t necessarily expect hur-dur-six-hundo level of audio quality.
Generally I find the “Apple tax” worth paying for consumer gear if it’s something I can actually make use of. I’ll be very interested to see how these stack up, but unless they’re the second coming of headphone Jesus I already have enough headphones.
finding this a really weird comment. In both NYC and Chicago I've had no problem walking into a store where I can try many different sets of headphones and talk to someone on staff about my listening habits, taste in music, and environment where I'll be listening. Both times I got straightforward advice and wound up buying a headset that lasted at least five years that I loved.
this is like saying "programmers follow trends and there are many things in the tech industry that are frauds therefore you should not program the computer"
It's not remotely like that. They're talking about how people will spend dollars to defend their 'audiophile' badge with no regard for what if any actual impact it makes on sound fidelity.
ah yes programmers are so smart, they would never spend dollars attending conferences or buying training or buying service contracts to defend their 'scalability expert' or 'tech guru' badge with no regard for what if any actual impact their pet technology choice makes on their startup.
It seems like you are arguing against yourself now. If the phenomenon you describe is real, and you think it's also present in audiophile circles, then you agree with the post you replied to in the first place.
Your earlier allusion to "not program the computer" is a bit strange. Nobody is saying "stop listening to music".
It's fine to spend a little extra on actual good quality headphones. Or to push for certain software design for good/pragmatic reasons.
It's less fine if the headphones are completely overpriced because of unsubstantiated claims or unproven features. Same as it is less fine to push for some software design because of infatuation/obsession/narcissism despite significant downsides.
Some programmers do go to conferences and buy training courses to keep up appearances regardless of the impact on their actual performance. We mock them for it just like we mock people who buy $1000+ headphones to impress other audiophiles. Responding to this fact with "people waste money on conferences, so you shouldn't program" is like saying "people waste money on headphones, so you shouldn't listen to music," though.
> RJ/E Diamond prepared Cat 7 Ethernet cables use solid 100% Perfect-Surface Silver conductors, which completely eliminate strand interaction, one of the biggest sources of distortion in cables, for clearer, more dynamic and involving sound.
Your last paragraph could easily apply to Apple fans and their unjustified love of Apple products.
Any fandom or hobby has over the top individuals who spend 10X the effort for 0-10% gains. Just like there are people who install their own electrical pole and transformer for audio equipment, there are apple universe devotees who claim they need all the added features and then just browse the web.
Do you think it preys on delusion more than the "high end" spaces of other niche markets? I think the same kind of upsells occur in spaces like sporting gear, bags and luggage, computer peripherals, etc. Hell, I think even fine food and wine are similar in how they project an artificially high "taste ceiling," if you will.
It really wasn't intended to come across as an argument, thats why one isn't present. I don't think this is really a problem easily fixed (short of overhauling the ethos of consumerism). I was just curious if the commenter thought the "high end audio gear" market was distinct for some reason.
Yes, the audiophile market is uniquely stupid, in that they tend to make specific claims that are objectively wrong. The ethernet cables come to mind, or any (digital) cable that's supposed to be better at conducting a signal than any generic spec-compliant alternative.
Wine, for example, just doesn't usually come with specific claims, except it's "good", or "fruity", or "created in the rich terroir of the L'Alpesian Valley". That region may not actually be better than any other, but it is different. Beyond that, everyone knows it's a matter of taste, with no objective measures of "good" or "bad", although there are obviously (imprecise) trends that many people tend to agree with (i. e. wine is better than vinegar).
Ah, yeah, I'm with you. I think the distinction between taste-driven preference vs technical superiority is important (maybe a more interesting discussion would surround the juxtaposition of audio gear and organic/non-gmo food marketing).
But, I do think the same kind of "objectively irrelevant" upsell _does_ occur with the other non-taste-driven markets (electronic peripherals, sporting gear, etc).
I'm not trying to come across as combative - I'm just trying to figure out why the consumer side of the "audiophile" market gets such a bad wrap. As I commented elsewhere, I think a majority of people who are "into" sound gear don't buy into the snake-oil of special ethernet cables... just as I don't think most consumers opt for gold-plated display cables. However, there are distinctions between different monitors and TVs; people seem to agree that they are perceptible, and they don't bat an eye at someone spending a bit of their time figuring out the optimal display for their situation and price point. I think I'm just trying to understand why, when someone compares headphones to other headphones based on pricepoint, they are assumed to be ceramic-cable-buying elitists.
the commonality between the phenomenons of audio and wine etc. is that they start on a foundation of objectivity and end in subjectivity and cognitive bias. Hearing and taste are two things that are literally unique (almost impossibly equivalent, probability wise) for every single person.
As you go towards the top end of these things, the delusion creeps in, which is that the objectivity extends from the foundation to the roof, so to speak. The fact of the matter is that it was gone somewhere in the middle, e.g. why "trained listeners" cannot distinguish between a coat hanger and $1,000 cable, and while "wine experts" will often pick a $15 grocery store bottle over a $300 bottle in a blind taste test. And they will reverse their answers if told the price ahead of time.
These same concepts exist in other product categories, but I don't know of any better examples than audio and wine.
>they will talk in terms of money(i.e. 150$ headphones vs 500$ headphones) when talking about audio quality.
Isn't this the same as computer nerds talking about how much they're spending on their graphics card or their motherboard or whatever? I agree with your overall assessment of audiophile nonsense, but higher quality components and manufacturing processes cost money, so there's a limit to how good a $60 pair of headphones will sound (and hold up over time, for that matter) vs a $200 pair. In particular, it's not like folks who care about the quality of their audio equipment are _actually_ fixating on the price itself; brands like Bose are poorly regarded _precisely because_ their headphones have noticeably worse sound quality (and, in my own limited experience, fall apart faster) than the competition at any particular price point.
> Isn't this the same as computer nerds talking about how much they're spending on their graphics card or their motherboard or whatever?
GPUs have measurable performance benefits. Many people tend to buy more expensive parts than they need and there are diminishing returns (justified as "futureproofing"), but at the end of the day you can easily run reproducible benchmarks to determine exactly how much performance you bought.
Audio quality is much more subjective and there's a whole lot of snake oil. You can certainly recognize a higher quality pair of cans to an extent, but price is not necessarily correlated with quality.
I agree but my point is that it doesn't have to be like that and I have distaste towards fixating the overall product experience on the "sound quality per $" metric. Any product that emphasises on anything beyond that metric is talked down and its users are branded as "uneducated suckers". It's impossible to explain that you want a headphone that looks good, is light, can fold, can connect easily etc. They are extremists that prey on balanced products and people like those.
That's why I like what Apple is doing: earphones/headphones designed with overall experience in mind.
It seems you you are a huge fan of Apple, but you haven't explained what Apple is doing here that is interesting or unique.You can have any opinion you want, but I don't think you understand what the audiophile market or community is. There is nothing "deeply troubling" about buying a Sennheiser HD600 or an AKG K702 or buying a DAC or an AMP to listen to audio if you enjoy doing that.
> I would't usually have problem with such things but they often slide into extremism and quickly pushing you on the money-spend-for-audio-performance scale where you are simply supposed to check you bank account to see what sound quality you are about to get.
You can say that about anything. CPUs, GPUs, Expensive low latency memory Memory, high performance cars, etc, etc, etc. If you chase high-end performance you end up paying a lot for diminishing returns.
> Apple is my hero in that regard, where you actually pay for the product experience instead for being part of some deeply troubling subculture where passionately debating about very expensive cables and gadgets without ever being able to pass a blind test on the claims is the norm, almost like cargo cult.
Modern music is usually heavily distorted on purpose at the mix step, I mean what's the point of buying equipment with high fidelity to listen to layered synth or auto-tuned voices? Recording engineers don't use audiophile gear, and it's no surprise when you have seen a typical guitar signal chain. Being able to discern instruments and layers with clarity and definition take years, yet I'm always amazed at what people failing to recognize the most basic things or issues, or do a basic EQ, will spend money on.
I was an Apple Music subscriber listening music on AirPods until I bought a pair of studio reference monitors for 700 USD equivalent (Yamaha HS8). The joy of listening for hours without pain or fatigue from these while WFH is great. These ays my AirPods run out of battery and cut out in the middle of a meeting. The need for all kinds of portable battery powered devices have significantly gone down while working from home.
"instead for being part of some deeply troubling subculture where passionately debating about very expensive cables and gadgets without ever being able to pass a blind test on the claims is the norm, almost like cargo cult."
That sounds like Apple though ...'I pay for fewer ports!'
I don't get replies like this. I tried a bunch of high-end headphones through a switchable amp and I bought the one I thought had the best qualities I was looking for. There was a clear and huge difference in quality and character between each headphone but I didn't need the most expensive one (Sennheiser 650 I believe) because it sounded too nice for my purpose (studio). Went for the BD 990's instead.
Distortion and frequency response graphs are pretty important but not the only important thing in terms of sounds quality. And sometimes you want speakers or cans that simply look cool or have a certain size.
now you are talking like an audiophile yourself - just kidding :-)
there are people who appreciate high quality audio vs people who want 'seamless audio experience' vs snake oil addicts. They all are completely different things.
I don't think you need to be an audiophile to notice that my $160 Beyerdynamic DT880 would blow any AirPods out of the water in terms of sound quality. And also comfort honestly.
> Apple is my hero in that regard, where you actually pay for the product experience
What do you think the audiophiles are paying for? The only difference here is that you appreciate white boxes and thin devices rather than gold-plated connectors and oxygen-free cables. You like your thing but don't like theirs.
I didn't realize the latency on AirPods was that bad. That actually explains a lot of the difficulties I have with phone calls on them. (One of my hats is "audio engineer", and two people on AirPods plus transmission delay has to get up into the 350-450ms range, and that definitely is fatiguing given that my ears are always cued to this.)
Back to holding my phone against my face, I guess.
Yeah, this is crazy that Apple is only using AAC for their codec and not anything like aptX that can get down to 50ms range. I would expect Apple to do better here and even have different low latency codec specifically for voice calls.
These are not the professionals, professionals and people who like to listen to music are completely different bunch apart from audiophiles.
The audiophiles don't like music and don't make money from their equipment, they simply obsess with it. They are like those camera nerds talking about the sensors, color science and so on but are not actually into photography. The professional photographers simply use the equipment for the task and the people who love photography don't obsess with the camera. Same thing with the audio.
I'm a proud audiophile. For me it was always about the music.
These are not incompatible pursuits. In fact, they pair rather nicely.
As a kid I was amazed by music on the cheap radio we had. And then when I listened on headphones, it was a whole other world full of details I couldn't hear on the cheap radio speaker. And it made me fall in love with music even more.
As an adult I spend a few years learning about the gear and making various purchases, even building my own speakers from kits. Did I like tinkering with the gear? Yeah, that was kind of fun, but it was largely a means to an end, which was the music.
The unfortunate fact is that music lovers who don't think about the gear are getting a crappy version of the music. If you know what you're doing, you can get some pretty world-class sound for well under a grand or even a few hundred bucks. If not, you get a Bluetooth speaker for the same amount of money that sounds like garbage and sucks the life out of your music.
You can still enjoy music that way! Many do! I sure can! But it's like wandering through the Louvre with filthy, smudged glasses. If you really like the art, it's worthwhile to clean those things off so you can really see what you're looking at.
I'm sorry but you seem to have some sort of vendetta against a group you are branding as audiophiles, which shares very little in common with the vast majority of audiophiles.
There definitely an element of being a gearhead, but I just really love music, and want to listen to it in the most accurate way possible.
> The audiophiles don't like music
That is a pretty bold claim to make with such confidence about a massive and diverse group of people whose name literally means lover of audio.
I bet I spend 20 or so hours a year researching headphones. My current daily drivers are $11 earbuds and a pair of $80 cans for focused listening. As with most things, there are a vocal few who do obsesses and come across as elitist, but I have a hunch that people like me are the (largely) silent majority.
I'll spend a little on earbuds (AirPods, actually), but I feel you on the headphones. I do a lot of audio and video work, and after extensive research over the last ~decade I've just got literally half a dozen pairs of Sony MDR-V6's around; they're $100, they sound pleasant and also reasonably representative (though not as representative as my monitors, which is to be expected!), and unlike the Beyerdynamic DT-990s they actually fit on my head (I am a problem for hat-makers).
Well, I would consider myself to be an audiophile. I got professional level equipment for about $400 many many years ago. Today it is probably even cheaper. I spend a lot of time on PSU, interference from power grid etc... Solved by $20 car battery...
For an "audiophile" AirPods are ripoff similar to CD demagnetizer.
That puts it in the same price category as: Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-1, Beyerdynamic DT1770/1990, Grado RS2e, among many many others.
Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. At least airpods have a unique selling point in their portability and ux but I don't see how this benefits over-ear cans.
Apple has been very successful at leveraging a “complete the set” psychology among the faithful. When you’re happy with all of your other Apple gear, it’s easy to impute — to borrow a favorite Steve Jobs word — the level of quality you’re accustomed to onto a new product you’re unfamiliar with.
Apple has ALWAYS operated at a premium margin, and appealed to users who want quality, but also don’t want to spend time comparison shopping laundry lists of features and components.
These will appeal to people working from home, just in time for Christmas when people are willing to spend a little. With a pandemic raging, if you’re in the market for headphones you can’t exactly go out and try a bunch of pairs on. (Guitar Center is going bankrupt, if I recall.)
So people will likely be happy to know there’s a product made by Apple that fills an additional niche — so they won’t have to give it much thought and will know that it’ll probably be of similar quality to what they’re used to with other Apple gear.
Assuming these compare in fidelity of sound, I think it’s a no brainer for a lot of people. Likely works seamlessly with apple products similar to other airpods and, unlike those other cans, doesn’t require a proper sound system or external amp to drive them.
That being said, the fact that they stipulate they only work with apple products is a bit insane to me. I’ll stick with my wireless Sennheisers that I have to charge once a month thanks.
EDIT: Here’s the bit about them being Apple only. Hopefully it changes.
AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
I imagine that like the Airpods they require an Apple device to take full advantage of all the features but they can still be used as a generic Bluetooth headset on other operating systems.
> the fact that they stipulate they only work with apple products is a bit insane to me.
If (and a big if, though also a possible if) they are truly exceptional and better than the competition, the desire to own these could funnel into buying more Apple products in general, so you can use them. Also, if they are that great, non-Apple users will find another reason to switch to Apple and it will boost the overall brand.
The Airpod Pros works with other devices - but they seem to have a lot of issues though. Loosing sync between each unit and loosing sound and needing reconnect all the time.
That's my personal experience when using them with Windows 10 and Android devices. No issues when using them with Apple devices.
Even if it changes, don't ever buy an Apple product to use with a non-apple product. I got burned by this with the powerbeats pro to use with my Android phone, which has ended up as the single worst electronics purchase I have ever made.
They have a significantly reduced feature set when used on Android vs Iphone, and they just don't work well at all.
Really glad Apple decided to buy Beats so that they could close off their audio technology to Apple customers only.
AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
Besides assuming that Apple can’t match those other (very small, likely undercapitalized) audio companies in terms of sounds quality— something I sort of doubt considering that Apple probably spent more in R&D on these than those companies have had in total cumulative revenues combined— it also assumes that it’s all about the sound quality. As someone who just ordered these, I wear noise canceling headphones (currently Bose QC from nearly 5 years ago) for several hours a day while I work, and I can tell you that I care much more about comfort and noise canceling performance. I just assume great sound since that has been available for decades now in decent headphones. I remember buying Grado SR80s back in 2002, and they sounded great. Unfortunately, they hurt my ears after 30 minutes and everyone around me could hear my music. Also, they had a thick, heavy cable. Sound quality isn’t everything.
Considering that Apple just made Intel look like a bunch of fools despite Intel making more processors for longer than just about anyone, at this point it’s silly to be so skeptical of Apple when they introduce a product like this after years of effort.
When Sennheiser is very small and/or undercapitalized and therefore must know nothing about audio... I really hope you’re either joking or just uninformed.
That's true, I was more thinking of the smaller, boutique companies he mentioned. Sennheiser had $916mm in 2019 revenues. But consider that Apple is estimated to have close to $18b in total AirPods revenues in 2020. And my point isn't that they "must know nothing about audio," it is that they do not have some kind of monopoly on audio engineering. There is absolutely no reason why a company like Apple can't hire the very best people and give them insane amounts of resources to produce a better product. Also, it's important to remember that Sennheiser has dozens of products (I count 26 over-ear headphones alone on their website) and must spread R&D resources much thinner. Apple focuses all their energy and spend into just a couple of key products.
I personally would be very interested in hearing your opinion on how good the noise cancellation is with these headphones, compared to Bose QC (which I am wearing right now). When you have them, could you comment?
I have never owned anything from Apple. However, that new CPU suddenly sounds interesting, and it may be that these headphone are suddenly interesting too, although they are double the price of the Bose ones.
After using the AirPods Max for around a week so far, I really like them. They are super comfortable, the noise canceling is really solid and seems better than my Bose QC35, and the microphone sounds really good in calls.
That kind of knee-jerk rejection is just as weird as a knee-jerk promise to buy. All we know right now is that Apple has introduced wireless, ANC, over-ear headphones at a premium price.
If I were looking to spend that kind of money on headphones -- which, we should be clear, isn't that hard to do if you're serious about it -- I'd absolutely listen to these. Given Apple's general approach to usability and quality, it'd be insanely foolish to dismiss them without trying them.
>Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price.
This is what I'm talking about. How do you KNOW that $other_headphones sound better? The Apple model isn't even available yet.
I mean, it's dead solid clear that Apple's making a big move here. It could fail. But they tend not to fail. If they're pricing these on par with serious high-end over-ear headphones, then they expect them to be able to compete with those high-end headphones on all the points people care about in that market.
& about that: Your counterexamples aren't in Apple's target market here at all. None of them are wireless, and none of them include noise cancellation.
Moreover, the Audeze are open backed, which (for the non headphone nerds still reading) means those around you can hear what you're listening to. You get great sound that way -- lots of folks would argue that the best sounding phones in the world are all open-backed -- but it means they're terrible choices for most modern headphone applications, like in a public place or open office.
I love me some Grados, but they have the same problem.
Apple's play here is against the high end wireless, ANC product in the market, not these audiophile-only options you mention. I have a $300 pair of ANC wireless Sennheisers that I typically used on planes (ha, ha; remember travel?) or in other contexts where I really needed isolation. They're clunky to use and have weird idiosyncrasies, but they do sound better than my Airpods Pro, and they work better for long flights.
If they broke, would I consider the new Maxes? Absolutely.
> This is what I'm talking about. How do you KNOW that $other_headphones sound better? The Apple model isn't even available yet.
I feel this part of the discussion is missing. A lot of people seem to love the HomePod for it's great audio quality at the price, and I have heard similar things for the HomePod Mini. Apple seems to be getting decent at making high quality audio equipment(per $), I feel like the quality of these headphones could be similar to the competition.
Apple for sure has a history of overcharging for certain products (remember, you can get a monitor stand for $1k), but the M1 Macbook Air is probably the best $1,000 computer by a long shot.
They're not going to fail, unless you have an insanely high bar for success, and they're not going to sound like shit either. Apple wouldn't just accidentally release a terrible sounding headphone product without having people familiar with headphones listen to it.
The arguments floating around here are pointless. Will you be able to get better sounding (particularly wired) headphones for less money? yes. Just like you can get a higher performance laptop for less money than a macbook, and just like you can buy a discrete graphics card that performs better than integrated graphics (analogy to wireless w/integrated DSP and amplifier, vs. discrete)
Is the point here to have the best sounding headphones? no. There are for daily/practical use cases and pleasantly usable performance for dedicated listening and entertainment. They are primarily headphones for "routine use"/work, e.g. when your listening to music + doing some task, then taking a phone-call or joining a meeting. The same use cases people currently have noise cancelling headphones with built-in or inline mics.
For example, Bose QCs are very popular for that use case, and cost $300+. I use them for daily work and travel, and I'm an "audio person", with completely different setups (plural) for audio quality use cases, well aware that the Bose QCs are not "$300 class" headphones quality wise.
The Apples are more expensive than the QCs, but even from pictures and build materials immediately crush the QCs in build quality. My guess is that they will also beat them in sound quality. Yes they're more expensive, but tbh for the target use case, it is not difficult to justify cost for something you use 8h a day. Of course anything expensive is not in everyone's budget, but considering the target market, people talking about $200-less headphones are not priced out of the headphones, they're just trying to save money.
So, true to Apple, the increased cost doesn't really hurt their addressable market, and instead positions them a status symbol where it is actually important that they cost more than the competition. Yep.
How do we know they offer better sound? I’ll wait for some reviews. Apple doesn’t enter a product category like this lightly or without careful price setting analysis. This is almost exactly the reaction people had to AirPods when they were announced.
I don't see how that's an exception at all - price sensitivity is presumably really low at that end of the market, and Apple priced accordingly. Who's realistically gonna pay $6,000 for a monitor and then buy an aftermarket stand to save $900?
These are in a completely different category than pro audio headphones, they are wireless with active noise cancellation.
As someone that owns a couple of the high end models you mention, and uses my Bose qc3 headphones every day, if you don’t get why that’s a difference all I can say is I highly recommend trying it. If you don’t want to pay $550, then get the Bose or Sony equivalents.
All the audio quality in the world doesn’t do you much good walking down a noisy street, on a plane, or even sitting in a noisy open office. I’ll happily take pretty good sound + wireless and noise canceling over great sound in these environments.
What I’m guessing Apple is trying to sell based on this price point is sound on the same level of the high end models you mention, with the convenience of wireless noise canceling, plus the (gimmick?) of spatial audio. I’m very curious to try them at some point to see if they deliver.
The Airpods Max is more comparable to something like Sony WH-1000XM4, Bose 700, or B&O Beoplay H9. You can't really compare wired openback headphones to headphones that are meant to be worn in public on the go. However, even among the wireless headphones with active noise canceling, the Airpods Max are more expensive than their competition. The closest in terms of features and price is the Beoplay H9 and that is $50-100 cheaper depending on where you buy it. To many people the extra integration with Apple products is worth paying the difference. For other people, especially those not all in on the Apple ecosystem, the cheaper competitors are a better option. However, comparing it to products in a different class is not a very good argument.
Considering how many hours per day/week most of us spend with our headphones and how many years they last, I think the price difference is marginal over its lifespan.
My Bose QC35s are almost 4 years old. My initial thought was to upgrade to the Bose 700 ($340), but the Airpods Max are $210 more expensive. If I assume 3 years before my next upgrade, this equates to $6 more per month.
The in-ear segment was a slam dunk for the AirPods Pro - no exciting options competing there (Sennheiser's True Wireless were a huge disappointment). In the wireless over-ear segment on the other hand, it is very competitive and there are great options. The H1 chip isn't that much of a leg up, compared to how well Sony, Bose and the others handle connectivity to multiple devices. It'll boil down to the basics for me: audio quality and noise cancellation - if Apple can nail those, the price increase would be worth it in my book.
That's a bit presumptive. You don't know how these sound, yet. HD660S is based on 650S from the 2000s. Knowing Apple, they were able to innovate a bit here, so let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
That having said, I also don't expect them to sound better than any of which you mentioned.
Similarly I'm seeing several comments in this thread saying other companies offer better headphones for cheaper. We simply don't know how these perform yet.
When Apple releases a new product and it’s not understood why people would buy it, I’m always reminded of this quote from former Palm CEO Ed Colligan when the iPhone was launched:
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.”
Since then I’ve not wanted to bet against Apple.
The reason people will buy these is because they are part of the Apple ecosystem. I have no knowledge of this, but I’m sure their out of the box pairing experience will be much like other Apple products. Hold your phone near it and it just connects. Far more seamless than most Bluetooth pairing.
Any audio controls are built into your phone.
And typically Apple has hardware and software designed to work together. They’ve done this with the iPhone camera to completely disrupt the digital camera industry.
It’s the ecosystem plus the benefits of hardware / software integration.
Yeah, that's a big part of it. I've had BT headphones before my Airpods, and I really kinda hated them all. They were just clunky and awkward to use. Airpods changed my expectation around that kind of listening.
The competition for a $549 Apple over-ear ANC headphone is, realistically, $300-$400 over-ear ANC headphones from everyone else. Because user experience and usability matter a LOT; I'd definitely pay a premium to avoid all the goofy crap that goes with "regular" Bluetooth.
Yeah, those are pretty crazy. However, that whole product line is clearly not intended for normal consumers. It’s for video editing, where most products are insanely expensive and that $1000 monitor stand is lost in the noise of all the other production costs.
Sony WH-1000XM4s will set you back $350 and these are favourite NC headphones for many.
The AirPods Max have some clear advantages over those: 9 microphones, huge suite of positioning sensors including gyroscope and accelerometer etc. Presumably the sound quality and NC will be at least as good as Sony's, and the software, UX and "build quality" significantly better.
I’m finicky about audio quality, still I favour Apple products generally.
I was willing to give Apple a chance last year and got AirPods Pro, but they proved abysmal in terms of everything—comfort for wearing long term, isolation, sound quality, going out of sync with each other, and a while ago one of them started to emit loud noise randomly. It’s likely that some of those issues are related to my unit and individual fit, but I’m back to Shure SE215/SE425 and their black foam tips (which achieve very similar overall attenuation without active NC[0]) as my go-to in-ear headphones.
For over-the-ears I have fairly old (and virtually unbreakable) Sony WH-1000XM3; when their battery goes I would love to give Apple another chance but the price tag makes it hard to justify.
IMO to any audiophile/sound engineer familiar with the brands mentioned by eertami the price of Apple’s new AirPods would indeed appear outlandish.
I have the XM3s too. I agree about their indestructibility (they're the only headphones I've owned in years that haven't broken within a year or so!), but mine have developed an annoying hissing sound in one ear when noise cancelling is on. They also have that "plasticky" feel and annoyingly "creak" in the headband when they move around.
The comfort is unmatched, however, and battery life is still fantastic on them despite very heavy use. Not sure I can imagine that battery ever dying!
I've been toying with the idea of buying XM4s but I'm tempted by Apple's. I guess I'll give them a try and can always return them if the comfort etc isn't as good as Sony's.
Comparing to XM3, I find it strange that AirPods Max don’t fold. I mean, it seems insignificant, but it does really take away from portability and convenience, which are (since for stationary listening I can get high-quality, made-in-Germany reference monitors at the same price!) among the main attractions.
The only feature I find worth considering AirPods Max for is, unexpectedly, the 5.1/7.1 sound. If it is truly done properly (which I doubt, but promo materials hint at something there) then I have to admit, I don’t have the room for a proper setup like that, so this could be an accessible way to try working with surround sound.
Suspiciously, nothing is known about the codec and connectivity in general. If new AirPods are limited to kbps-starved AAC/SBC, like AirPods Pro, that’d be very frustrating. I know, diminishing returns, but I don’t want yet another sound reproduction system “optimized” for streaming at Apple Music bitrates (especially if it’s 7.1). Sony’s LDAC aside, something approaching 600 kbps like aptX—or, absent that, at least an external audio in!—could make the price almost seem acceptable.
Thanks for the pointer, I was unaware about the bad batch and will very much attempt to get a replacement. Not very hopeful as it’s been nearly a year now and unfortunately I’m not anymore in the same country where the Apple Store I bought them at is.
I'm not sure where you'd get the SQ and NC will presumably be better. If you compare the AirPod Pros and the Sony WF1000s, Sony comes out ahead in most estimations I've seen. Sony has been doing portable personal audio for an awfully long time, given that they basically invented the form factor, so they're not likely to be lagging behind too much.
Don't get me wrong, Apple is OK at consumer audio. The Homepod is nice, so are the APPs. Even Beats aren't too bad nowadays. But they haven't released consistently better audio products than Audeze, Sennheiser, Sony, M&D, or even Bose--their closest comparison, since both Apple and Bose lean hard on DSPs for their SQ.
I suspect the second version of these headphones will be pretty excellent. Apple does learn from its mistakes, whatever they'll end up being. Trick is Bose and Sony will have learned from their mistakes too. It'll be interesting to see if Apple ends up being able to compete on audio, not just style.
Yep, this is exactly what I expect. I also expect they'll cost $350 by next Black Friday and force the rest of the industry to copy the build quality and some features.
> Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price.
Have you tried them? How do they sound? Do you have a time machine that takes you to Dec. 15?
My defence would be that Apple isn't an audio company and although they're great at everything they do, I doubt they can catch up with Sennheiser, Grado, Audio Technica etc when it comes to pure audio quality.
Where they're better is probably connectivity, noise cancellation (which is still garbage imho), integration with their hardware.
Same with their Homepod - it was innovative not in absolute audio quality but in the way it was omnidirectional and could "fill a room" with sound (if I remember correctly, from having read a review) and connectivity. If you just want great audio for your vinyl, CD or Flac collection then you don't get a Homepod. $300 worth of HiFi gear would be better.
The development budget for the Max was in all certainty bigger than the development budget of the flagships from any of those companies, if not bigger than the companies themselves.
I would not be surprised if Apple shatters the value of their headphones. Apple’s $9 DAC outperforms many “audiophile” DACs costing hundreds or even thousands of dollars.
This is what drives me nuts about stuff like this. How can you even say that? There's no way that you've tried these headphones so how can you possibly say that? Apple has gotten rave reviews with regard to audio quality in the Airpods Pro and the Homepod and Homepod Mini so why wouldn't they take that expertise and put it into these?
Apple has absolutely not gotten rave reviews on airpod pro sound quality. In fact that's that biggest complaint, they sound the same as normal airpods. I own airpod pros. They're great for what they are, noise cancelling true wireless that interact very well with apple products. But the sound quality leaves quite a bit to be desired.
On top of that, going off of what that review mentions, the AirPods Max look to solve exactly that problem and compete with exactly that range of product.
I HATE the standard Bluetooth experience. If reviews show choosing and switching devices is a better experience with these headphones, that’s worth paying something extra for.
I agree with that in the case of something like the AirPods Pro but not necessarily for $549. Superb audio quality would have to be the main selling point at that price.
I'm all for shitting on overpriced products but those you list aren't the same product category.
Wireless noise cancelling headphones worth a damn are expensive. Not to mention, Apple is the only company making a headset where the mic doesn't suck and have trash fidelity when you need to speak and listen at the same time.
I'd love to hear an Airpods Max mic test here. This is the only meaningful info I could find on its microphone:
> With AirPods Max, voice calls and Siri commands are crisp and clear due to beam-forming microphones that block out ambient noise and focus on the user’s voice.
Mic quality has become a much higher priority for me and I think others since starting to work from home. In my opinion, high-quality voice audio helps greatly improve the quality of conversations over VC.
Part of this is Bluetooth's fault, but Apple has found a way not to kneecap their mics over bluetooth so I'm not sure why industry leading wireless audio (Shure, Sennheiser) that have put engineer years into low power, low latency, high fidelity wireless codecs can't make a headset that doesn't sound like Skype on DSL.
Does anybody know if any product of "established professional audio companies" has built in "gyroscope and accelerometer" and can remap "the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves"?
I guess some virtual reality headgear has something like that, but which audio headphones?
And which audio headphones of "established professional audio companies" have four microphones built in and the chip with "10 audio cores" to adapt? Including one microphone directed to the ear, not to the outside. I guess some could have something close to that, but which?
First to know if we compare apples and oranges, then to learn about the alternatives.
If you play audio on your phone while wearing Airpods, and you turn your head, it still sounds as though the audio is coming from the direction of your phone.
Traditionally, it's not about the phone, the technology is meant to provide the effects one hears with the complicated 5+1 speakers and similar setups (typically today called "home cinema" etc), where you can "hear" the effect or the music appear from different directions (e.g. behind your back, right and in front of you left, or even the steps moving across the room). The effect can be heard when you're in the center position between many speakers and the content is produced for that. But, if you move your head while wearing the headphones (which should help you figure out where the sound comes from) the change that gives you the idea "where something is" won't be heard if the headphones aren't able to "know" that you moved your head at that moment and adjust the sounds accordingly. For adjustments, typically a lot of computation is needed. In VR or AR the same effect could give you a direction information of everything virtual around you. The virtual door on the right of you scratches, and as you approach it you hear the noises louder, as you turn your head, the noises are obviously from behind the virtual door... etc.
Edit: to answer the "stereo" question: so it's about the audio mixed in more than 2 channels, or VR and the like effects.
So movies, for instance, are recorded in 5 or even seven channels. You want the front channels to sound like they're coming from the phone, and the back channels to come from the opposite direction of the phone, etc.
I don't know if Apple's tech also activates for stereo audio.
From the direction of your phone? Like if you left your phone on the counter and you're walking around the kitchen the headphones attempt to make it sound like audio is coming from your counter?
I don't trust any of those companies to deliver Bluetooth headphones that use best-in-class audio protocols to prioritize audio quality over compatibility. I expect them to outsource a Bluetooth chip that can't negotiate AAC over the air, because they weren't willing to pay the chip cost or licensing fee. I expect them to be unable to easily pair with five separate devices (including Windows 10) and transition between them rapidly. I expect them to cheapen their audio experience when they go wireless.
If Apple's new thing was wired only, I wouldn't even consider them. I already have my custom balanced-XLR Beyerdynamics on a pile of Schiit on my office desk. They serve that purpose beautifully, and I see no reason to change that.
The DT1770s that you compare them to are not wireless. They're not in the same market at all as Apple's wireless products. Of the manufacturers you list, I trust none of them to meet wireless needs. I trust Apple to meet wireless needs as much as I trust Beyerdynamic to meet wired needs.
> Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price.
Because it's Apple. The same reason people pay the Apple premium for anything else. It's the brand, the aesthetic, the ecosystem, and the signaling.
I don't know that. I have Apple stuff already (like most people) and know it's high quality. Trying Sennheiser is taking a risk for me. I'd pay to not take that risk.
I can't help but find this a little funny, because I consider Sennheiser the least risky purchase in the audiospace, but at the end of the day, the market for Senn is very different from the market for Apple. That point just typically falls on deaf ears in the audio crowd.
>"I don't know that. I have Apple stuff already (like most people) and know it's high quality. Trying Sennheiser is taking a risk for me. I'd pay to not take that risk."
Only some of Apple is quality, the rest is quality with quotes. The Apple's extended warranty program is worth billions, so is the repair industry fixing all the broken apple products. Heck they have yet to design a charging cable that doesn't fray. How is that quality?
Are there any other laptops with trackpads as good as the Apple ones? Maybe there are these days, I don’t know, but there definitely didn’t used to be.
Why people buy MacBooks when there're Dell? Why iPhone when there're Huawei. Etc, etc.
Because it is Apple. When your Audeze will break can you just pop up to the nearest Apple store to get support? Can you easily connect them to your iPhone, Mac, iPod?
If I wanted $4-$600 over-ear headphones to go with an iPhone where phone calls and general phone integrations are an important part, then I'd seriously consider these. Otherwise not. As you say, as far as headphones go you can get better for less. But if seen as a phone headset that also has some hi fi qualities, then it makes more sense to go with the ones from Apple.
I trust Apple to make that 100% integration with my iPhone whereas I don't necessarily trust Sennheiser to. The third party ones will turn out to drop calls more frequently in iOS 15 or something similar. That's the kind of issue you are paying to avoid.
These are not professional reference headphones. The goal isn’t predictable EQ for mixing music that will be played on a huge range of outputs. These are consumer headphones that provide wealth and status signaling for the wearer with enough audiophile “reasons” to pretend that is not the case.
I don't understand the higher end audio space and may be that's why, I don't quite understand your statement.
What makes these other companies good at audio that Apple cannot match? They are a huge company that have been making audio products for a really long time and (no matter what one thinks of them) they own Beats too. So I actually say, if Sennheiser and others can do it Apple can do it better, not just because of their approach but also because of their SW/HW integration story.
It might be a bit of a hot take but from my point of view audio is mostly a solved problem. It's not like video where we still have trade-offs in terms of quality due to the huge bandwidth and processing involved for very high resolutions as well as the difficulty of reproducing very high dynamic ranges and framerates.
None of this is relevant for audio. Despite what some audiocultists would have you believe CD quality is basically as good as it gets, you cover effectively 100% of the (normal) human hearing range, both in frequency range and dynamics. Ok, ok, technically not 100% of the dynamics, but few people care to listen to "distant ventilator on a quiet night" followed by "Airbus A380 taking off from the point of view of the jet turbine".
Of course the quality of reproduction matters a lot, playing a CD through cheap $5 earphones is not going to sound great. But even there the cost of decent quality electronics keeps dropping and dropping. You can get a good quality DAC for a trivial amount of money (and stand alone DACs are still usually overpriced because they're for the niche/enthusiast/pro market, everybody else uses whatever their smartphones/laptop/desktop has integrated).
Buying ultra high-end, ultra-expensive "audiophile" equipment these days is effectively like buying mechanical watches. It's because you like the luxury and craftsmanship, or you're making a fashion statement. Apple knows that, hence these AirPods. If you're about function over form you'd sooner get a cheapo Casio quartz watch.
And there's nothing wrong with that, it just annoys me when audiophiles try to justify their fashion statements with pseudo-science.
“spatial audio” is the killer feature here. It’s one of the last “unsolved” audio problems (at least in available headphone/earphone product lines), along with the upper frequency limit on noise canceling, which this product doesn’t solve.
Spatial audio (and by extension, binaural audio) has been an ongoing research project in a lot of different places over the last 10 or so years. The problems involved have been mostly theoretically solved, but Apple is the first to bring to market a consumer product that takes various Dolby multi-channel surround sound input types and outputs a true binaural stereo audio stream that varies with head (and screen) movement in 3d space.
ehhh I'd say mostly solved. The problem of turning a recording into a perfect sound-wave replication is actually not easy, because the physical world is annoying with heat and friction and and physics.
I'd say 24/96 is comfortably the "end game solved problem" quality for source recordings though, not CD. Even if it is just for the baseline safety margin that it is easier to implement perfect filters with no transition bands anywhere near the audible frequencies, and that additional bit precision has no downside unless you get into accuracy problems with noise on the recording side.
From the speaker point of view, I think IEMs are the closest to being "solved", since the tiny drivers minimize the physics issues with larger drivers, they are probably closest to pure reproduction. For full-size speakers etc., pure reproduction can be accomplished for certain frequency ranges by individual drivers, but over the full range it is not so "solved", e.g. with bass there is often a physics issue with the kinetics of moving a large driver cone in perfect phase-sync with the relatively tiny and light tweeter.
I've actually been wondering if speaker cones are a possible application for graphene.
Audio (gear) is nowhere near to being a solved problem. One open problem is to match your own personal HRTF to your gear. Audio (production) is also not a solved problem. Your experience is decided by the recording/mixing engineer, and there may be multiple renderings possible of the same content. In much the same way, different conductors of the same orchestra can produce different flavors of the same composition. Then there is the spatial localization for games and movies, which is still not quite solved.
>And there's nothing wrong with that, it just annoys me when audiophiles try to justify their fashion statements with pseudo-science.
Yes, those people can get nutty, ignore them! Audio is much bigger than Audiophile :)
Having said that, with no pressure from consumers, why would anyone invest money in new headphone designs? I recently purchased a pair of planar magnetic headphones which used to be crummy when I tried them a few years back. The newer design is very efficient, the manufacturing process is also pretty solid, and the sound is fantastic.
Because the best headphones are the ones you use the most. You won’t need a portable amp to make the sound better. This is the same analogy on how the best camera is the one you have on you, and the iPhone camera does not suck.
I have a set of grados and I use them so little because of inconvenience. Instead is the AirPod pros that’s with me and use 95% of the time
>Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price.
Probably because most of these companies have been "upgrading" their headphones for years, but really just making tweaks and increasing the price. So much of it is just marketing.
I'm a former headphone addict who used to own a lot of expensive headphones. I saw the progression from when $300 was expensive (if you exclude the electrostatics), to suddenly $1k is the norm for a "High End" headphone. Then $1.5K, then $2000, etc.
I'm not planning to buy the Airpods Max, but I give kudos to Apple for finally stepping up with computational audio and doing more than just making minor tweaks and marketing the hell out of it. Apple might actually push the other manufacturers to get off their ass and do some actual innovation.
Because the Bluetooth profiles that allow two-way audio streaming (HFP and HSP) define a lower audio bandwidth. Your Bluetooth headset is probably switching from A2DP to HFP or HSP when you start a call.
I'm surprised spatial audio is a selling point for anyone on a product this expensive. Have you tried it? I have AirPods Pro and I spent £6 on a month of Disney+ just to try out the spatial audio feature when it came out (which already felt fairly ridiculous but what can I say, the HN comments were too enticing). I used it for 5 minutes, rotated my head around a bunch to maximize the effect, thought "hm, that's pretty neat" and then went on with my month never using it again. It really felt like a gimmick to me but I'm wondering if I'm missing something now...
For me the biggest downside of spatial audio is that it's iphone or ipad only. You have to choose between a big sound or a big image, but you can't get both. If I had spatial audio on my imac, I would consider it a valuable feature. Now it's mostly a gimmick.
Yeah, this is a large part of the reason I don't see myself using it much either -- if I'm at home watching video it's almost always on a TV screen. Also, I don't understand why it's still only supported by a couple streaming video services (none of which I personally use) -- Netflix already has Dolby surround audio in many of their videos, so shouldn't it be pretty easy to enable spatial audio in their iOS app? Well, clearly not, but I don't understand why.
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to try it out yet. I'm not particularly interested in the TV watching use case (I don't watch TV), but I think that there could be some cool AR use cases that I would love to play around with.
Such as a Zombies Run sort of game where you could hear the zombies behind you, or approaching from other streets. Not sure if any such applications exist yet, though?
Interesting, thanks -- I hadn't thought about using it for games but I could see how it might be more interesting for interactive stuff. I'm not sure if there are any iOS games that support it yet but presumably it's possible? (Didn't find anything with a quick search.)
I'm happy with my AirPods Pro, so I won't be buying these.
That said, looking beyond audio quality alone is why these exists. None of those headphones has the ease-of-syncing these will. I'm pretty sure none of those headphones support the spatial audio stuff these will. My corded Sennheiser HD280s started flaking off around the ear not too long after I bought them, while these seem like probably they'll wear better over time.
Audio quality? Yeah, I'm guessing Apple's aiming for "good enough for most people," nowhere near studio quality. But on everything else, I suspect they've nailed it, especially for people who've used AirPods or AirPods Pro and appreciate the syncing, spatial audio, etc.
I don't plan to buy it (I have Air Pods Pro and Bose QC35 II and they works well), but if I'm on the market for NC headphones, I would probably pay premium for Apple's, if reviews doesn't find any glaring shortcomings. Why? Because of the small things - switching between active devices on AirPods works very well for me (today I received a phone call by telling my iphone to switch to AirPods even if they're attached to my laptop), automatic detection of the right ear, head tracking (these spatial sound demos sounds amazing and I hope more applications will support it).
These things means more to my average and aging ears than some flashy audiophile names.
Haven't listened to them, but just looking at the features it's pretty obvious these aren't for the same people. Apple's cans are Wireless high quality headphones with Active Noise Cancellation, transparency mode, and seamless switching. The only thing they have in common with the ones you listed is "Headphones".
This is all setting aside the fact that you are prejudging audio quality of a product nobody has reviewed.
I suspect there are a ton of people like me who are just fine with good sound and very interested in getting wireless noise cancelling headphones.
For every value product (e.g. the SE lineup), Apple puts out an outrageously priced one like this.
Much like the $129 wireless charger (cable sold separately),it's intended for die-hard fans. Apple user demographic is across the entire economic spectrum so I'm sure that 1) this will sell well and 2) it's a great pair of headphones.
Worth pointing out that this doesn't have any auxiliary ports so you can't use it on airplanes, etc...unless there's an upcoming lightning-to-aux adapter. It feels like a culmination of the "no headphone jack" vision started with the iPhone 7.
For the record, the best headphones in the world are the Sony MDR-7506s, which sell for less than $100 in the US. These are well-known in the audio production and musician world and are prized for their accuracy, frequency response, comfort, and output. I’ve tried plenty of other high-end cans including a few $1000+ audiophile-realm models but just didn’t connect with any of them. In fact, I’ve owned many pairs over the past 2 decades and I just keep buying these when the get too tattered. I still have my first pair and they still sound as good as the day I bought them.
> $549!? ...I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price.
In addition to brand trust which other commenters describe, there is multi-device interoperability within the Apple ecosystem. Pairing with multiple devices is non-trivial and multi-device operation is not as seamless with non-AirPods hearables. This is about extending the AirPods user experience (UX) to an over-the-ears form factor.
Bang-for-the-Buck consumers always struggle with Apple positioning. UX is almost always the intangible factor.
I dunno if the price is worth it or if it's mostly Apple Magic Pricing TM but honestly having a virtual assistant on hand is pretty good for day to day use - I'd love that in an over-ear.
Combine that with wireless and presumably Apple's headphone device switching ability and I'd be tempted if not broke
> better sound at a cheaper price
Oh nice you've tested them then? How's the sound for mainstream non-gold-plated ears?
Does everyone here realize how incredibly huge Apple's audio business is? Their Wearables, Home, and Accessories business did $30B last year. If AirPods are even 1/5th of that category, that's a $36 business.
For comparison, Sennheiser did about $1B in revenue and Bose did $3.6B.
Are are absolutely huge and capable of surpassing every single company in terms of product and audio quality.
when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price.
I won't argue about the price. But considering that exactly zero HN commenters have tried these, how can you categorically state that the audio is bad? People used spec sheets to make the same assumptions about each iteration of AirPods and were wrong each time.
They must have some marketing strategy already prepared. Similar to that of Beats by Dre. Just make it popular trough popular culture (movies, music videoclips, interview with Hans Zimmer wearing these) and the kids will persuade their parents that they just need to have it. Thats how the bandwagon picks up speed.
We are interested in the same audio gear. But they have CABLES!
Most people I know would rather want a headset without any and I suppose that wireless devices come with an array of software problems that Apple can fix better than the others (just supposing, I don't own wireless speakers myself).
And significantly cheaper than, say, Sennheiser HD820 or the Focal Stellia.
We cannot know whether the price is crazy before somebody has reviewed them. I'm sure we don't need to wait for long.
If it's an amazing experience, it might be a good deal. I know I would pay huge amounts of money at this stage of my life for a great experience. Like a hundred euros for a single glass of whiskey. Or hundreds of euros for a great meal. And headphones (even battery powered ones) last a whole lot longer than a shot of whiskey or a meal.
But. They're wireless, and Bluetooth 5.0. They will be Bluetooth 5.0 in 5 years, and possibly obsolete because of that. Passive headphones bought today will be just as good in 5 years, unless something weird happens in speaker technology by then.
While I agree that sound quality is likely much better with those headphones you listed, they all require an external dac/amp to realize that quality. For high end, wireless, noise cancelling headphones, this might be appropriately priced.
Pricing a product is always a very hard thing. I speak from experience working at a startup and trying to understand what price the market will bear.
The beauty with Apple is they build beautiful products that people covet. They effectively create a new market and force people to re-assess what they would pay for XYZ feature. I am sure the average user would never dream of spending $500+ for a pair of headphones yesterday. Now the landscape is all different.
Its the same for the iPhone. Why do these things costs $1000? I can get most of the same features in just as nice a package with many Android phones. But still iPhone is the dominant winner in the US market.
Brand new iPhone SE is $400. Entry level iPhones have never cost more than ~$650. The entry level specs are good enough for 80% of people’s needs, and an extra $100 or $200 probably satisfies 95% of people’s needs.
I don’t see the purpose of the “$1k iPhone” meme when it’s blatantly false, and competing Android phones have also always cost around the same amount.
And what’s also been blatantly true is the amortized cost of an iPhone over its longer lifespan versus competing products has always been lower.
The iPhone 8/X generation turned a lot of people off because of its totally unaffordable pricing. The 8, which took the entry-level spot but was essentially a previous-model phone, cost $700, and the X was $1k. They’ve made this mistake before.
The only possible saving grace that I can see is that it’s an image strategy: price a product very high in the first generation to build an “exclusive” image, then lower its price over time to increase sales.
Apple products are now "for the (wealthy) masses". Unfortunately they focus less on professional users.
Beyerdynamic DT-1990 are great headphones btw but I don't think Ill see anyone walking around with that :)
If you only use Apple devices, the way they integrate with your mac / iphone is probably better.
But, given that these only work with Apple devices...
I'm going to be honest, I have a set of Beyerdynamic DT 770 pro's collecting dust right next to me as I type this. (I used to use them when I worked in an office.) I have some 3M "hearing protection" muffs that I bought for mowing the lawn, and they happen to have bluetooth headphones in them. They aren't as good as the DTs, but they are pretty darn close; and good enough that I prefer them when I travel to the DTs.
Technically we don't know that yet. I mean, I'm not impressed with the price/value of e.g. Beats, so I'm not super hopeful, but I'll still withhold judgment until the reviews are in.
Apple has made excellent headphones in the past, and at a competitive price point. For a long time their IEMs were a strongly recommended option for people who wanted excellent headphones at a pretty reasonable price. It's entirely possible that these headphones will also be competitive with headphones from other established companies that sell for a higher price. This is the same company that just brought us the M1, so we know they have hired plenty of engineering talent.
You can’t beat 8 drivers in one ear producing different frequency ranges in a custom sized devices made from a mould impression taken by an audiologist with 1 single cone. Sorry but no engineering talent can break the laws of physics. But agree they should make a great product overall regardless.
> You can’t beat 8 drivers in one ear producing different frequency ranges in a custom sized devices made from a mould impression taken by an audiologist with 1 single cone
> audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price.
It's not just sound though, right? Can you point me to an offering that offers the same features that Apple is offering here? Wireless, with a high battery life, automatic switching, Siri, noise cancellation, spatial mode, etc.
> At least airpods have a unique selling point in their portability and ux but I don't see how this benefits over-ear cans.
I don't see why portability and a good UX are somehow not needed for over-ear headphones.
Paying an extra $200 for the H1 chip to be able to avoid professional audio companies and and their absolutely incompetent Bluetooth implementations is money well spent.
At this price, it is a luxury that can wait until AirPods Max 2, as I have already upgraded to XM4/Buds+/Jabra 75t this year for work and pleasure. However, at first glance, some integrated design aesthetics will provide the necessary appeal for dedicated fans e.g. the digital crown, colour scheme etc. It would be interesting to see the real world tests, and for starters, I would settle for a mini review by tubers like MKBHD.
My other disappointment is how they didn't use this to improve bluetooth too.
They could of used this to add a new set of proprietary bluetooth protocols to improve the audio quality of voice calls and general listening. BT microphone + headphone streaming is fairly high latency and low fidelity. Same with general audio. Could of called it Apple Bluetooth HD or something similar.
You're assuming they'll sound worse. I don't consider that a safe assumption.
Apple is an established professional audio company. Macs are the computer used in production and DJing, have been for decades. They take sound seriously, and when Apple says less than 1% distortion across the entire audible range, well.
They could be lying, but I wouldn't bet money on that.
It’s ludicrous but I’m still tempted. It seems like they uniquely offer the best UX in headphones since unlike AirPods you don’t have to intermittently take them off to charge them if you’re using them all day. “The best UX” is assuming you’ve bought into the rest of the Apple ecosystem, of course.
That puts it in the same price category as: Palm Pilot, Blackberry Curve and Nokia N95, among many many others.
Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional phone companies offering better phones at a cheaper price.
"Magic" syncing, spatial audio, and transparency mode are likely top three.
Many people didn't see how iPhone was better than its competitors at first either, mostly because they were focused on the things the competitors emphasized and dismissive about what Apple brought to the table. Until, of course, those things because all any company was trying to deliver.
Computational audio is another, it has the H1 chip, its gonna be Apple exclusive algorithms that make soundscape absolutely bonkers. Sort of like Dolby proprietary stuff.
Better is subjective. It most likely doesn't have the audio fidelity as the headphones OP mentioned, but something like Transparency mode is such a great feature for me.
The end product experience doesn't always correlate to existing metrics of quality.
That's because the ones mentioned are all audiophile headphones focused only on sound quality. There are plenty of headphones, notably the Sony wh1000xm3 for $230, which have bluetooth, noise canceling, and a built-in microphone plus they work with non-ios devices
I must've misinterpreted
> AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
It also says: "AirPods Max can be used as Bluetooth headphones with Apple devices using earlier software and with non-Apple devices, but functionality is limited."
Perhaps because when you walk into the Apple store for headphones you won't find the other brands there and these shoppers are only interested in Apple blessed products.
Completely expected for Apple. Look at the top of the mass market, copy their features, embed it in the iOS ecosystem, make the case white and silver, charge 25% premium.
The core 5% of their audience would just buy what they know rather then spend their time researching the market they don't know and don't have any interest in. Spending that time and attention on research would be much more expensive to them than the cost of the headphones.
And the 95% really want to signal others that their time is as expensive as of those 5%.
Apples customers don't know that. The entire strategy of Apple is, selling to people who compare a EUR 1500 MacBook to a EUR 500 HP laptop. Of course the MacBook is a lot better. Similar, these need to be a lot better than AirPods. They will be, and they will sell.
Well it depends. Once in a while Apple makes very good products for its price (like the latest Macbook Air, the iphone 3GS back then, and a few Macbooks in early the 2010's compared to the competition) and yes for the rest it's all about beign a luxury brand, absolutely.
$300 for an iPad is too much, where no other device can come close in functionality or price? Same with $400 for an iPhone SE? You're being obtuse, read into the context of this conversation.
There once was a poor minority boy who had bad parents through no fault of their own. They wanted to become a programmer, they got a $100 Android and started working on an app. Upon finishing they publish their app for a one time 25$ fee.
But that only reached half the market.
So next the boy bought a $1000 mac, a $400 iphone, and a $125/yr app store subscription. Lol
The coloration of the iPhones are an impressive example of product differentiation. The lower end phones are distinguishable with a case on from the front and back by the colored bezel on the front, and by the camera arrangement on the back.
The price is high at $549 however given Apple's proven audio engineering I will give them the benefit of the doubt on sound quality on par with similarly priced headphones from Sennheiser, etc. I mean have you heard the speaker quality on the 16" MacBook Pro?! Literally no other laptop sounds as good.
My biggest concern is if they are user serviceable. I have a pair of Sennheiser that cost around £700 when I bought them 16 years ago. Granted they are not wireless but I can and have repaired them with parts directly from Sennheiser.
I doubt I will be able to do that with the AirPods Max which is a concern. At this price point I expect them to last at least ten years and there is no chance a battery will last that long so if it is not replaceable I can't see why I would buy these over an alternative in the same price range.
Sure they have some "cool" features but that does not justify a product that will most likely have a battery in need of replacement in 3-4 years becoming worthless.
Edit: OMFG They use Lightning for charging not USB-C?! WTF are Apple doing :(
Six years in and my BackBeat Pros have over 1000+ cycles and still last 15+ hours out of their original 24hr. I don't notice a functional difference, I still recharge them about every 3 days.
It's not 10 years but the experience of owning a lithium-battery powered pair of headphones has not degraded as much as I was expecting. Hopefully the Apple batteries are replaceable though, it would really suck to have a $550 pair of headphones that you have to keep tethered to a desk.
That is a good experience that unfortunately I didn't have with my daughters Beats that lasted ~3 years before the battery was down to around two hours. Granted this was before Apple purchased them so perhaps things have improved since then.
My daughter now has a pair of Sony XM3 that she loves but she will no doubt want these. Lucky for me she is now 18 so can buy her own expensive headphones :D
All of them, the hassle is just going to an authorized service provider. Most of the time the entire device is replaced but do you care? The end result is even better.
Agree that Lightning for charging is crazy for a new product in 2020.
With regard to the battery, I expect apple will replace it for you at the Apple Store, probably for around $75. I believe they'll do it for iPads (including Pro) for $100, and in fact they give you a completely new (refurb, honestly) unit. So you also get a brand new screen with no scratches, which is nice. I don't know if they'll do replacement units for headphones, but wouldn't be surprised.
I don't understand apples 'proven audio engineering'. The airpods pro don't sound good and cost $250. Incredibly muddy vocals, bass is washed out, and they just don't make music sound good. I need to crank the volume sky-high before they start to sound ok. A $15 pair of sony wired earbuds beats them out in terms of sound quality. The ANC is meh, I can still hear people talk in the background, and theres a decent amount of audible static. For the good reviews, I'm incredibly disappointed.
Their laptops do sound miles better than the competition though, and the homepod is great for the size. I don't know if I have a defective pair or what, because they don't sound good at all.
I think that reputation comes from Apple's historical care for iPhone audio engineering which used to have a massive advantage over Android when it came to latency, quality, and dev APIs.
It feels like we are seeing the result of diminishing returns with technology advancement.
To make a product that Apple believes is significantly better than the competition they had to design a very intricate solution that includes:
* High end look and feel not similar to the bulk of their products with lots of textile webbing and memory foam ear cups. These get way more wear and tear than normal electronics being exposed to sweat, sunscreen, etc. On top of that these must be safe for long skin exposure and comfortable across many head shapes and sizes.
* High quality magnets with custom speaker design for low THD and large frequency range.
* 2 custom ASICs built for sound processing and low power bluetooth and 10 audio cores each.
* 10 microphone array for ANC and wind noise cancelation.
* Multiple accelerometers + gyros head tracking with spatial audio.
It you remove one of those components, I'd be surprised if Apple still shipped this. At least 40 people worked on designing and engineering this new headphone. There are not many companies in the world with the right kind of talent for this and Apple happens to be one of them.
I don't understand the point you are trying to make. You lead with a statement that sounds like disappointment, but then build up to the engineering complexity involved. What are you trying to say? That this doesn't add up to a great product? How long have you been using them for?
I think the parent commenter is saying that in order to make a superior product these days, you need an extraordinary amount of investment for R&D which can only be made up by selling it at volumes that someone like Apple can achieve. I think their comment is about bang for your engineering buck.
This seems like a win for everybody. In the past a lot of people spent money on luxury goods which translated to over-paying brand name and status symbol. I would consider products like Beats headphones to be in that category; they were technically inferior to many other headphones but cost as much or more than professional headphones. It is interesting to see Apple engineering maintain broad appeal in product design while adding quite a bit of functionality.
I think Metcalfe's Law [0] for networked services is a bigger driver for winner-take-all, than needing deep pockets to compete in a mature product category. For consumer products, a small number of large players can own entire market segments between them, but still compete with one another, as we see in other capital-intensive industries like cars or smartphones. (And it's fair to see that as its own problem; but it generally devolves to the question "if markets are universally the most efficient form of exchange, why are firms a thing?" [1].)
Not necessarily, especially in areas like sound where it is essentially ‘solved’
Why should humanity put so many resources towards improvements that no mere mortal can notice? It’s probably better to put the talent on other problems...
> I think the parent commenter is saying that in order to make a superior product these days, you need an extraordinary amount of investment for R&D which can only be made up by selling it at volumes that someone like Apple can achieve.
True if you're selling average products for average people. Not true if you have a niche.
I don't know how you read a negative or judgmental tone into that comment... GP is basically saying that consumer technology has advanced to the point where you need large teams doing complicated or deeply technical (and somewhat incremental) improvements on existing technologies.
It's not a judgment on the product. It's just a lament that the days of individuals or small companies innovating in the consumer electronics space are (long?) over.
I didn't see it as a judgement, just didn't understand the point. I guess you have provided a little more clarity. How sad is it to generalize the idea that disruption can no longer occur. That is one of the saddest things I've read all day. There are numerous cases where companies 'advance technology' into a product to the point where someone comes along with something simpler to undercut the existing player. Apple isn't a good example of this because it's very hard to disrupt their products. They have extremely focus on the end user and simplicity.
It's not just the values they place on the end user and simplicity, it's their huge amount of cash they can use to test and deploy technologies (think spatial audio partners) and their tight grip on supply chains (try sourcing some of the same materials an iPhone is made of).
I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, the best chance at making a wave as a consumer product concern is to make waves on some sub-component of the larger product being produced by the majors. You aren't going to compete with Apple, Sony or Bose directly, but you can improve on new technologies or extant processes and hope to get subsumed. That's the truly sad part.
No. Apple needs large teams doing complicated or deeply technical things. That's their market. They're in consumer electronics. If it takes 50 people to ship 100M units, then it takes 50 people.
The first sentence only experiencing diminishing returns can be read negative. Also everything is easier/cheaper/faster than ever for individuals and small companies to enter the hardware space.
I suspect the best path for success that individuals or small companies can take right now is to focus on one piece of the larger product and aim for acquisition or licensing, sort of like the pharmaceutical space.
I think he means headphone tech is already complex and they needed to raise complexity a lot, lets say 10x to get something that maybe has 1.2x better sound. At least that's what I understood. In other words, you get diminishing returns.
You sound like you are selling these headphones. Yeah, making wireless headphones with active noise cancellation is complicated, what else is new. Same as making a smartphone, or a laptop, or a car. "Significantly better than the competition"? Sure they are if you listen to (or are) Tim Cook or some Apple fanboy, but really buying an iPhone is mostly a matter of preference, not really being "better than the competition". And "preference" is the best case scenario, because quite more often that's a matter of being victim of aggressive marketing.
I mean, AirPods Max may be actually better than the competition (unlike regular AirPods, which are a bestseller anyway). But they were just announced, why the hell would you assume that they are any good at all?
> But they were just announced, why the hell would you assume that they are any good at all?
I'm not an Apple fanboy, but people said the exact same thing about the M1, which basically blew everyone away. So the track record pretty heavily favors Apple here.
Because Apple released a product recently that received excellent reviews, all Apple products are assumed to be good? All Apple products come out of the unit that produces their processors. All Apple products are owned by the teams responsible for their Macbook / Airbook lines. All Apple products can achieve whatever innovations that occurred with the M1 chip.
I understood what you're trying to say. I still disagree.
The products and technologies involved are too different to take any goodwill and apply it universally. Even in the same product there are issues with subcomponents: The M1 is great, but the touchbar is still mostly useless and the keyboard only improved recently. How can we possibly say anything across products?
Even though they were not as recent, I believe your argument would be more compelling if you used Apple's more similar products, e.g. AirPods Pro, or perhaps the latest watch.
I balked at the price but if they've solved the wind noise problem I'd think about getting it. I love to walk outside when I have calls but the wind makes it impossible most days.
For someone that already has some decent over ear headphones, I read the entire press release thinking that these would be great to get. I was pegging them at $249 to $399 max. $549 shocked the daylights out of me! This is beyond too expensive for me to consider. Maybe it will come down over the years but there must be a very slim market of people who can pay that. I’m not usually shocked by an Apple price but that’s nuts. Few hundred dollars more and you can get a state of the art M1 MacBook Air and some amazing non-Apple headphones to go with it.
That's also the range I had the price at in my head. $550 is far too much for headphones. It's not quite as insane as the ridiculous monitor stand or Mac Pro wheel pricing, but it's not far off. I don't really get what their market is here.
It's more insane than the monitor stand. That monitor stand is for a monitor that is aimed at professionals working on HDR content. It's a very low volume, specialised part, $1k isn't entirely unreasonable.
These headphones will be mass produced in huge volumes. It's a consumer product. Just a very expensive one.
I disagree, the stand it is entirely unreasonable, it will sell, but not because of reason, its the only option for now, you're cornered having to add 1k to the 6k purchase because of it and production companies will sign off.
This headphones will sell for the reason that people don't want to/have time to research headphones, they know this will integrate well with what they have and will justify it since is also a fashion/social class statement.
They wont sell because they're headphones, they'll sell because they complete the apple wearable ecosystem.
Totally understand that we all adjust our minds on Apple pricing but giving that headphones aren’t a new and amazing technology, I think that’s an uphill battle for Apple. After seeing this announcement, I just bought a pair of Grado SR80e. They have amazing sound and it’s sub-100 bucks. My Airpods are amazing for outside and running around at home. But for time in the chair, wired headphones are awesome.
It's important to remember that most people in the US, at least, don't pay $800 for their phone. They pay a couple hundred and the phone is subsidized by monthly cell phone bills.
Yes, but like ... it's easier to swallow when it's hidden in the price of a phone bill every month. And, I think for a while, you were stuck in contracts and the bill didn't go up, so it would be $100 with or without a new phone, it's just if you have a new phone, you're stuck in the contract for 2 years.
edit: I don't know if this is still the case. I buy all my phones full price anymore
Yeh so do I. I don’t get it. I do the math every time I get a new phone and result is always that I pay the exact full price of the phone over two years down to the cent, but I limit my choice of cell plan to the ones supporting that phone.
$800 for a device that many people use multiple hours per day for a few years.
I doubt any other device comes close to a rate of $0.80 per day for the amount of utility you get from it. If you use it for 4 or 5 years, like I do, that goes down to as low as $0.50 per day.
Day 1 reaction was sticker shock, but yes, I see your point. If it's insanely comfortable, connectivity a breeze, and sounds amazing...yeah I can see it now. Most bluetooth on headphones with the blinking dot UX is horrendous so maybe people will pay the premium.
I mean yeah $800 is a lot of money for a phone. Even Apple sells the iPhone SE for $400. For $800 you could almost get a MacBook Air and you could buy multiple iPads.
$800 would be outrageous to pay for an iPhone 4. For an iPhone 12? I'm not sure it's so ridiculous.
I've had my current iPhone for 4 years. If I buy one $20 bag of coffee beans a month, then I've spent more for coffee in the last 4 years than I have on my phone. Seems like a good deal to me?
They don't support the mic over wired connection which is unfortunate, as even apple products are limited to pretty bad mic audio quality over bluetooth.
I realized this issue when I replaced a set of wire/bluetooth headphones with a new pair, and noticed the mic quality was way worse, even when wired. It turns out my old ones had a wired connection for the mic, and my new ones always use bluetooth for the mic.
After googling a bit, I found there's still no high quality microphone audio profile inside bluetooth, even after all these years.
Yes, I don't think any wireless headphones on the market get around switching to HSP during phone calls and switching back to A2DP when music/audio resumes.
Does anyone else think it's hilarious they release a pair of headphones with a 3.5mm jack after courageously dropping it from all their phones a few years ago?
Is the brave move in a world without headphone jacks.. to bring them back?
How many products does Apple have to release before people stop trying to say It WiLl FaIl YoU CaN GeT SoMeThInG ChEaPer ThAtS BeTtEr. It is exhausting.
For this round in particular, Apple is not competing against the Grados and Beyerdynamics of the world, they are competing against the Bose QCs and Surface Headphones of the world, particularly those with integrated mics. The vast majority of people buying these ~$300 headphones for daily general use/work/travel can afford ~$500 headphones as well, if they want them. So true to Apple, they do not reduce their addressable market with increased cost, but rather turn themselves into a status symbol among the consumers in their targeted market, due to the increased cost, not in-spite of it.
The headphones will sound at least as good as the direct competition because it's not that hard to do among this class of headphones. Give them some common-sense credit. The build quality is already better from pictures, compared to all-plastic which dominates the market. The user experience will be better with Apple products than pure Bluetooth, as everyone knows.
I'm not even going to touch the audiophile discussion. I'm an "audio person" as well, but again, exhausting discussion. Nobody knowledgeable about audio would use anything with noise cancelling DSP to achieve peerless audio quality. Nobody would use a tiny integrated amplifier and expect it to perform like a full-size discrete amp and wired headphones.
Just like I wouldn't expect my Bose QC headset to compete on sound quality with my Sennheiser IE8s, I do not expect my IE8s to work as a headset or reduce ambient noise while selectively allowing voices though. It is pointless to bring up these comparisons, especially in the context of "sound quality units per dollar".
These look magnificent. I’m Looking forward to a couple of years when the battery is dead and you can’t change it without breaking the glued case. This is similar to the reaction I have to announcements of new Google services due to notorious discontinuation.
Edit: judging from the explosion view, it does look to feature actual screws, so I'm cautiously optimistic they might last longer than 3 years, although you never know if they didn't add authentication to the battery to prevent it from being user-servicable.
One of the things I criticise the most of Apple, the whole AirPod line is a disposable product. If the battery dies you can throw it away.
I like Apple products but I will never own any pair of AirPods or any other product where you can dispose of it when the battery is done. This is a shareholders dream, but an environmental nightmare.
"After the one-year warranty on AirPods Max has expired or the up to two-year AppleCare+ coverage has come to an end, Apple will charge a $79 fee for battery servicing."[1]
I can respect apple's strategy. For someone like me, who likes convenience but isn't particularly obsessed with sound or sound quality, this release exists to frame Airpods and Airpods Pro as "value" options.
Personally, however, I'm actively working on moving away from this ecosystem. I've felt like every purchase is a lose/lose for a while now. I can't deny that Apple products offer a superior experience in almost every category, but feeling like I'm getting ripped off every time I buy is miserable, that's just not how I want to live life. I used to love apple stores, now they just remind me of nearly-mandatory $200 storage upsells.
Linux and custom-built hardware are a class of their own if you are looking to move. You can have the full experience by developing on Linux with cheap and powerful custom boxes and have a MacBook Air/iPad and an iPhone for the rest of your everyday stuff. At least that's my plan and the path Apple seems to be taking.
I am moving from Android to Apple ecosystem. I got an IPAD air 2 in 2015-16 and it still works without any hiccups, I had changed 3 Android phones in this time. Happy with my iPhone SE2 now.
For those of you who follow the industry closely. Is this a prelude to Apple’s VR glasses?
> Using the gyroscope and accelerometer in AirPods Max and iPhone or iPad, spatial audio tracks the motion of a user’s head as well as the device, compares the motion data, then remaps the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves.
Ding Ding Ding, we have the correct answer. These headphones are way over-engineered even by Apple standards. There is no reason for headphones to have a gyroscope/accelerator combination except to enable VR or AR audio in conjunction with their existing ARKit.
From my reading of the quoted paragraph, it appears these headphones will play system sounds (alerts, siri, etc) in such a way that they appear to emanate from the paired device - a very neat trick. If the headphones can do that then it is a short jump to making sounds appear to come from ARKit objects moving in real space.
It seems like it, at least as a trial run if the audio features. You don’t need the gyroscope and accelerometer to do HRTF (e.g. like the PS5 does, for example). Indeed it actually doesn’t make much sense to me for a static screen like watching a movie on an iPad or TV. I don’t want the audio to shift every time I slightly move my head or body into a more comfortable position.
Those features do make sense for hypothetical AR glasses where you move around a space with objects emitting sounds.
Nah. At least on the AirPods Pro, there appears to be no real positional tracking.
Try this. Watch something on, say, an iPad with spatial audio enabled. Turning your head left and right moves the audio so it appears to be coming from the iPad. Works great. Then turn your head, and keep it turned for a few seconds. The audio will gradually slide to where your nose is pointing, and will not stay anchored to the device for long.
It seems to me it's assuming that if your head is still, you must be looking directly at the screen, and recalibrates. The position estimates seem to be computed using accelerometers and not absolute positional tracking. Alternatively, it is actually tracking absolute positions but assumes that you want a "centered" audio experience even though the iPad is to your side. I think the former explanation is more plausible.
Also, try moving laterally to the iPad, so that you are no longer looking directly at the iPad. It will still keep your audio entered.
I'm not going to buy these because I'm happy with my WH-1000XM3's, but I understand the point the commenter was making.
Most people do not have the time or the inclination to exhaustively survey the market and technology when they want to buy headphones, speakers, laptops, and so on. They use low-effort proxy signals to judge the quality and desirability of products.
Brand is a reasonably reliable proxy and most Apple stuff is pretty good. At the very least, its rarely terrible, which you can't say about many other brands. If you know nothing about headphones but want a decent quality pair without looking into it too deeply, these are a rational option.
Their computers and general design is top shelf as far as I'm concerned, but when it comes to audio I'll put my trust in companies who've been in that specific business for decades.
Apple Beats for example are a bit of a joke to anyone who knows anything about audio (and I don't mean people who spend $$$ on cables).
For most people, volume=quality. If it can get loud without distorting, and "really thumps" they'll be happy. Clear that bar, and it's all about the non-audible pieces of the experience.
2. Don't otherwise hurt the user (there were cases of earbuds and over-the-ear headphones where the maximum volume would damage the wearer's eardrums, for example).
3. Easily and reliably connect them to the desired device.
4. High quality enough that the product lasts years.
5. Trusted by users that 1-4 apply.
Most audio brands are obscure for the average user. If I ask someone random on the street about Sennheiser they won't know about the brand.
You’ve forgotten about the Homepod. That sounds pretty amazing for it’s size and price. (I work in the music industry and have an unhealthy interest in monitors / headphones)
Frankly, I've owned several in-ear products from various companies (Shure, Sony, Bose, UE), and none of them hit the sound quality of the Airpods Pro. None of them. Maybe once you get in to $400+ IEMs, but I'm not spending that much on IEMs.
Similarly, the HomePod. I have used a Nest Audio (returned), Nest Hub Max (returned), Echo Studio (returned), a Sony GTK-XB7 (really like this one for parties as it gets very loud), and a UE Hyperboom (also really like this one as it has a 24 hour battery). HomePod has the best audio quality. Are there speakers that are better? Oh hell yes; I have a pair of Mackie MR5s that blow the Homepod out of the water. But also, they're five times the size.
I would not put it past Apple to do something great with these. In my mind, they've established themselves as being a top-tier audio equipment manufacturer, alongside Sennheiser, Sony, Grado, Beyerdynamic, etc, and I really think the people who don't believe this just haven't been using their full scope of audio products.
I do think one needs to answer whether $500+ is something one is willing to spend on a piece of audio equipment. Its a ton of money, and audio naturally has a rate of exponential decay of return (you can get 95% of the audio quality of $1000+ headphones with a $100 pair of the right ones). That's a separate question from whether they deliver value previously only seen in $800+ devices. If they can do that, then these are worth it to some people.
Wireless, in ear, multiroom, bluetooth audio stuff is generally a separate world from traditional hifi (= amplifier + wired speakers) so it's important not to compare apples to oranges.
Over the past 10 years or so it's the traditional hifi that's become the niche, a bit depressing.
Yes, unfortunately; the Chromecast audio is among my favorite products Google has ever made. I was happy to see Amazon produce something similar in the Echo Link, and I've thought about "migrating my Home" to Amazon/Echo just because of that, though I'm no happier about giving Amazon unfettered microphones around my home than I would be to give it to Google. One of the few reasons why I think the HomePod is such a fantastic, unique device; for all the wrong Apple does, at least they demonstrate a care for privacy.
You forgot that Apple owns Bose whose R&D is well-respected albeit a little controversial in the audiophile community. Their focus in the last decade was getting high-quality sound with middling commodity hardware and good software. Given that it's not surprising they're a good match for Apple.
Edit: Looked it up and apparently Apple's buyout was an April Fools joke some years ago. I've definitely talked about it on HN before and I'm surprised nobody's corrected me until now.
Bose, longtime frustrator of audiophiles, is a really neat company. They are extremely R&D driven.
Volumes have been written about them so I'll sum it up by saying that while they make some real overpriced crap at times... it is also true that over the last 50 years ago they have probably advanced home audio reproduction more than any other individual company.
Car audio, as well. Their role in car audio is extremely undereported, because a lot of Bose-engineer car audio is unbranded. But if you're wondering how factory-installed car stereos went from "sounding like clock radio speakers" to "honestly, fine" in the past few decades, Bose is a big part of that answer.
Yes, after less than a year my Samsung washing machine is making a horrendous grinding sound when spinning... I regret not getting a Miele that is likely to work better for longer.
Okay, I wanted to say this before but felt it was too off topic:
Never, ever, buy any Samsung appliances.
I own a few rental properties. The failure rate on any and all Samsung appliances is insane.
Their dryers are the worst. The belt tensioner is a plastic pulley with no bearing at all - it just rides on a sleeve. I've had a few of these go.
The front loader washers use some sort of zinc mounting place that reacts with the stainless steel drum and causes a failure (usually right after the warranty is up).
Just don't do it.
With companies like Samsung, quality doesn't necessarily translate across divisions. Their phones may be okay, but those aren't the same people designing the appliances.
I hugely regret buying a Samsung TV. I had sworn off Samsung due to bad experiences with their phones and other products, but there were enough positive reviews of the TV that I made an exception.
Huge mistake. Terrible software, hardware bugs, issues with motion interpolation (even basic things like 24fps over 30hz judder reduction), audio sync issues with sound bar, etc.
Since we're totally off topic I'll chime in and say all appliances are garbage now. Fridge, washing machine, drier? All total crap.
I suspect it's because they are considered fashion items now, people want to show them off. So they spend all they money on finishes and gizmos and screens. Then spend as little as possible on durability.
I’ve heard similar stories from other people I know. In fact, I don’t think I’ve heard someone speak positively about them, so when I look for appliances I steer clear of Samsung. I’ve stuck with Whirlpool for the most part and been quite happy.
Last year I bought a new house. Any guess what brand of appliances the kitchen came with?
The grinding sound is the pump trying to evacuate water. Your outbound filter is clogged. Look to the bottom left of the front of the unit, open the little door. Watch some Youtube videos on how to clean it. Agree with others that Samsung appliances aren't great, but if you inherited them like I did, you might as well learn the simple fixes.
Thanks for the tip but I already checked the filter after phoning Samsung. I will check YouTube just in case I’ve not done it correctly though.
Personally I think some research suggests it might be the suspension of the drum which should be easy to replace but there is no need for that to ever fail, even after < a year. Sorry for the off topic chat everyone :-/
When you aren't price sensitive, you apply that sort of thinking to most things, if it's a one-off purchase. I do at least.
I recently bought a car. I spent about a year deliberating over it, picking the right market segment, picking the right model, picking the right financing option.
Last week I bought a microwave. I just walked into the store, looked at what they had on the shelf, and picked a Panasonic one that was around the right size I was looking for. I didn't even look at the features, I just looked at 'Panasonic.'
The original point of product branding was to allow people to use it to purchase pre-packaged food from a source that they could trust.
The commenter is simply saying that they can afford the price and that they trust Apple's brand not to disappoint them based on previous experience.
That seems fair enough to me.
Personally, I wouldn't buy these because I don't like the styling. I'm also moving towards products made by OEMs rather than outsourced manufacturing as I'm not too price sensitive. i.e. I'm not in the target market segment.
If I could get over all that I'm sure these would be good enough.
You are looking at a phenomenon that economics would describe as the Cost of Search. It is a situation in which a market inefficiency exists because searching for a product is difficult, or involves research and/or background knowledge.
Part of the value of the Apple brand is that people will pay some fraction of that cost to avoid that search while also being sure that their product actually works.
Truly though, has there been another company which has produced such consistently high-quality consumer products over a 30+ year timeframe? I think there's a very real to be made for Apple zealotry; there really isn't another company like them.
It's true for the most part. They really do produce good quality products. The markup reflects the branding, true, but that's OK if the products are good.
I wish Apple had a competitor in the US. Google competes with software and phones, but is losing the phone battle hard. Microsoft puts out an operating system that is too busy making sure legacy software from 1995 still runs. All (most) of the hardware "competitors" run Windows and can't compete on the performance side. We need a company that produces their own hardware and operating system that competes with Apple, I think.
My Betamax VCR, my NES & SNES, my Realistic pocket radio, my microcassette recorder, my Matsushita 2X CD-ROM drives, my Tandy Color Computer 3, my DECMate III, my IBM PC 5150, my Toshiba Libretto, my Sony CD boombox, my ATI Mach-8 & Mach-32 video cards, my multiple XT & AT keyboards, and my A/V receiver with the built-in 8-track recorder would suggest maybe other companies are capable of it, yes.
What you're calling "attachment", others would call "trust". Like the sibling comment, my wife and I got a Bosch dishwasher when we needed one because we didn't want to spend a couple days becoming dishwasher experts to save a couple hundred dollars and obtain some criterial best that we wouldn't even appreciate in practice. We went on the consensus around the brand and the experience of people we know who got one.
I'm not sure why Apple receives this kind of contempt for having built a brand people trust for valid reasons (i.e., "I've had a consistently good experience trusting this brand"), going by the comment that's gotten so many bothered here.
convert that price to Canadian dollars and you are over $700. What the F are you paying for? To me there is paying for a quality brand and just throwing your money away. I sometimes buy a nice pair of Nike shoes. They cost me 150$ vs 35$ for a cheap pair. But the difference in weight, feel under your foot, the quality of rubber all makes for a better shoe that you feel the difference.
The AirPods is not one of those situations however that warrant this price and I think that is where the contempt comes from. Not that people should really care since we can buy many brands at a lower cost with same quality. But people like to hate on things that cost a lot of money I believe it is just human natural. I see it a lot on Facebook marketplace when someone posts something priced high several people will come on and make fun of the post and laugh at it. They never wanted to buy what was in the add to begin with but bother to take the time to complain about it. I am really sure there is some sort of human psychological drive happening in these cases. We just love to hate on expensive things.
My take on that comment: "I don't have the expertise to separate one pair of high end headphones from another. My experience with Apple products tells me Apple consistently puts out products that meet or exceed my expectations, so by buying the Apple version of product_x, I feel it's a safe bet."
"Not going to enquire after them, just make blind judgements of them compared to mine..."
"I'll take OP's probably hyperbolic label of overpriced at face value, and criticize them for making a purchase they project to cost them only an extra $3.33/month ..."
This elitist take is telling, though not really refreshing.
I'm sure there are mindsets other than that of anti-Apple zealots, but none that exemplify the phenomenon more.
That “phenomenon” as you call it, is otherwise known as a satisfied customer.
Nobody has time to exhaustively research every product they buy, and most people don’t have the inclination. Therefore when they find a company that meets their needs reliably, they tend to keep buying from them unless there is a problem.
This is a normal feature of business. Every business tries to satisfy their customers in this way.
If there is something special about Apple, it is that they have a lot of satisfied customers.
I'm sure there are other brands with that sort of
attachment, but none that exemplify the phenomenon more.
Get off that high horse and take a really honest look at your own life, and you'll probably find dozens of examples.
Do you research evvvvvvvvvvvvvverything you buy? Toothpaste? Underwear? Toothpicks?
Ever order from Amazon even though something costs slightly more because you're not sure if the other retailer is trustworthy and you don't feel like spending an hour figuring out if Bob's Wholesale Toothpick Emporium is a site you can trust?
I don't know about you, but my life is a combination of things I have obsessively researched and stuff where I just sort of relied on the brand name. When I need a pair of pants I usually just buy Levis or something because they'll be fine. I've only got so many hours in my life and I don't really feel like becoming a... pants expert.
The point is that these are not even close to "costs slightly more". Getting "name brand" whatever is perfectly normal. Getting Ferrari scissors for four times a reasonable price because, hey you know Ferrari from <not at all scissors>, is not.
First of all, you haven't heard these headphones and neither have I.
Second, I know a thing or two about audio. I saw an earlier comment mentioning that these use "plastic" drivers, as a sign that they are cheap. Generally speaking, the greatest speakers in the world use plastic or paper material for the cones in their drivers. (Google SEAS or Scan-Speak drivers for some examples). A minority of speakers use aluminum or other lightweight metals instead, but generally it is not preferred.
Third, most of the comments on this article are comparing them to traditional, passive headphones in the ~$500 range. These are active headphones with onboard DSP. The physical construction of a speaker matters much less when you can simply shape the response via DSP. If you've ever listened to Bose QC headphones with and without the onboard electronics engaged, you know there's a night and day difference and in addition to the noise cancellation, that difference is due to DSP EQ'ing of the headphone's output.
Fourth, Apple has a solid track record when it comes to audio engineering. They've had some misses, but their laptops, phones, tablets, and other devices tend to measure very well[1][2] in the audio department. So trusting Apple to "do the right thing" with an audio product (if perhaps not at a desirable price) is a reasonable proposition.
I can certainly understand when going to make a purchase wanting to choose a reliable brand. However, if you know nothing about headphones, why do you suddenly need an expensive pair now that Apple are selling them?
Bought airpods pro, love the noise cancelling sound, think they sound great (to me)
Bought homepod, sounds great
As a customer, I just trust that Apple will not put out a crap product in this price range. It may be missing a headphone jack or some audio balancing features that audiogeeks will care about. I trust that they will sound very good (to my average ears), good good and most importantly have a great resale value if I get bored with them
They will also make a great gift for the people on my list that have everything
> As a customer, I just trust that Apple will not put out a crap product in this price range
You have airpods and airpods pro, and you don't care enough about sound to spend an hour or two researching headphones. Why would you want these then? What about your current headphones isn't good enough that you are willing to pay $600?
> They will also make a great gift for the people on my list that have everything
I mean, so would a really great pair of headphones that costs $200 less. Also, if you are giving out $600 headphones as gifts, I would like us to be friends.
I'm just saying I get having trust in a company, but what you are describing sounds like more than that.
It's a discussion. If I saw someone on the street wearing these, it's not like I'd go up to them and be like "why did you waste your money on those?".
Anyway, the issue for me is that these are supposed to be audiophile/professional grade headphones - something you buy explicitly because you want the best audio quality. If you need these in the first place, then it's worth doing 20 minutes of research to see if it's the best quality for your money, or even in general.
I hate to say it, but I agree with the comments that mention these being more of a status symbol than anything. There's nothing wrong with that either, but that's the reality. I mean, they are pretty much guaranteed to perform worse than high end Sennheisers while still costing more, so what else could it be?
I find the argument of "I need professional grade headphones to do my job, but don't have the time to research the best option" just disappointing I guess.
I own AirPods Pro myself, but those are intended for a different market and are actually a decent value (compared to the Sony which has better sound quality but worse integration with Apple stuff).
> Anyway, the issue for me is that these are supposed to be audiophile/professional grade headphones - something you buy explicitly because you want the best audio quality.
No, they are not.
It's unlikely professionals are buying any wireless headphones and professionals definitely don't want/ need ANC.
These are headphones for people who want good quality sound and value the other features these offer. If you don't find the other features these offer appealing, they aren't worth the money.
Almost every criticism of these pits them against top end wired audiophile headphones... that's not what these are primarily competing against.
> Anyway, the issue for me is that these are supposed to be audiophile/professional grade headphones - something you buy explicitly because you want the best audio quality. If you need these in the first place, then it's worth doing 20 minutes of research to see if it's the best quality for your money, or even in general.
This is where you’re wrong. That’s not the audience they’re targeting. Their target is Apple users bought into the ecosystem who may or may not use AirPods. If they see an Apple made headphone, they implicitly trust it to be not crap and hardy even if it may not compare well to the competitors. Your passionate arguments for why there are cheaper alternatives don’t matter, this has been the same argument for a lot of Apple made products. They are one of the few companies on the market that has demonstrated a commitment to quality (for a premium, of course) for the masses. Their brand is very very strong.
I am not an audiophile and I don’t care to be. I like AirPods and my first reaction to this was: oh nice, my Bose headphones are pretty old. These look quite pricy but it’s Apple, I trust that I’ll get a fairly reliable product that looks beautiful and works really well with my phone (no custom janky apps).
I can't even imagine why my response sounded "upset".
> someone who isn’t being thrifty and researching every little thing out with spreadsheets.
No, I don't think spreadsheets are required. I probably wouldn't spend $600 on something that doesn't seem like it usually costs that much without reading a couple of reputable reviews first, or maybe checking to see if the features I want exist in a popular cheaper brand. OP isn't doing this because OP isn't buying the headphones to fulfill any need, but because they "trust apple". It's bizarre and hard to understand for anybody who isn't used to thinking of $600 as pocket change, I guess.
> I’ll probably get these for the same reason as the parent; I vaguely want some air pods but I haven’t got around to it and I prefer this form factor.
This was the part that confused me. OP has AirPods and AirPods pro and claims that he loves both. The part I don't get is blindly dropping $600 to buy something that doesn't even solve a problem for you. Apple puts it out, OP buys because it's an apple product.
> I trust apple not to sell useless knockoff rubbish in a shiny box. My relationship with them is no more complex than that.
This is the part that DOES upset me.
You think Apple never made useless rubbish? As we speak I'm typing this on a piece of shit 2019 MB Pro issued by my job. It sucks. Bad design (no ports, no magsafe, no escape key).
> It doesn’t affect you. They’re not telling you to do it.
Sure it does. This religious consumerism is favouring one of the biggest polluters on earth, with products that are as hard to repair as possible. And the favorism it's not even warranted: Apple produced a bunch of crap over the years. But zealots just ignore that.
And not only has this a negative effect on our shared resources, many people also plainly abhor when other people refuse to think.
You have a good point regarding pollution and repair policy, however you claim they have produced a bunch of crap over the years. Are you saying some of their products haven't been up to snuff? Or everything they produce is crap?
Also, the comment about people refusing to think is a bit obtuse, don't you think? Assuming that people who buy Apple products don't think is a ridiculous claim. At least recognize that those people might have a different calculus for their purchasing choices.
It's nuts how much toxicity there is around Apple.
> Are you saying some of their products haven't been up to snuff? Or everything they produce is crap?
Some. They also make good stuff. But look at Louis Rossman's Youtube channel, he rants about the common defects in the bad Apple products better than I could.
> Also, the comment about people refusing to think is a bit obtuse, don't you think? Assuming that people who buy Apple products don't think is a ridiculous claim
It was the nice variant of what I was trying to say ;) The mechanisms of Apple fanboyism work like a religion or a cult, and that's not a novel thought by me. In that context it's not absurd, it really is what happens: People buy these products often enough without an ounce of thought, it's religious conviction and our primate brain wanting to signal status. Not always of course, but often enough. And that does produce the negative reaction in others -> parent was asking.
This cuts both way though. You can see it in this thread and any other thread with Apple in the title - people bashing the product without ever even trying it out. They do so without an ounce of thought. It's religious conviction and our primate brain wanting to signal status.
I see a lot of well founded criticism of the price point and the praise that it gets before it gets reviews, backlash against the "I will buy that" comments. Wouldn't equate that.
And it looks like you are implying comments like mine are made without thought, which would be neither nice nor correct.
I assume this was meant to reply to a different comment?
Just in case: I did not say that people care about how things work. You get in every category Apple sells products in other products that are more affordable, do not suck and look good. Besides, many people buy Apple products that they can not afford, that's part of the problem.
People using 9-year-old laptops happily probably aren't agreeing with "Apple produced a bunch off crap over the years." There are plenty of things to dislike about Apple, but their products tend to outlast competitors, having very long lifespans. That helps to mitigate their non-repairability, though it doesn't eliminate it.
Really makes you wonder how these delusional claims are being peddled all over this thread - especially when you can easily find fully functional 10 to 15 year old Lenovos and Dells across the enterprise world. They purchased some obscure chinese brands from Amazon one time and concluded this is what life outside of Apple is like.
It really is astonishing, isn't it? Here you have a company with scandal after scandal regarding their bad long term durability - batteries being neutered, keyboards with keys that break, laptop displays that disconnect, unibodies that aren't unibodies, laptop coolers that don't cool -, embarassingly bad repairability and expandability across their product range, and that has one of the worst warranty programs of all of them. And for one inexplicable reason (stockholm syndrom? No experience with other products? Status thinking as the sole decider on what is good?) people still claim that stuff. That's also where the cult classification is coming from.
I mentioned 2011, which is well before the nasty keyboards.
You guys are spending a lot of effort to respond to things I didn't say, including anything at all about competitors. Sony Vaio laptops probably hold their value longest, AFAIK, but that doesn't mean Apple laptop haven't traditionally held value quite well.
Funny that you mentioned VAIO, because that was the last in a succession of crappy machines that bit the dust within a year before I finally bought a Macbook Air 9 years ago. It's still going. As is the 2009 Mac Mini I got from eBay in which I just upgraded the RAM and hard drive (to an SSD).
It's a similar story for me with smartphones. My first was a Droid X2. After about 9 months I switched to an iPhone 4 and used it for the next 5 years. Then upgraded to a 6s which I only retired for an 11 Pro last year because work bought it for me. They all work fine today.
I babied every Dell/Sony machine and that Droid just like every Apple product I've purchased since; this is just the proof I've found in the pudding after eating both kinds.
Yet somehow these products that are ‘as hard to repair as possible’, outlast all their competitors by years, are highly recyclable, and receive Greenpeace’s top rating.
I very much doubt you can find anything to substantiate your claim that Apple is one of the biggest polluters on earth.
They feel uncomfortable that the person above can shell that money on stuff that is slightly more than what they can afford. They then need to rationalise their decision that they made the best choice.
If I make $50 an hour, I am not going to waste 8+ hours searching and doing spreadsheets to figure out 'what is the best for the money' because I am already losing 50$ per hour. The new pair that is 'cheaper' costs as much as the device itself + as much as I 'paid' searching for it.
If it isn't my hobby, there is no reason to waste time on it.
I'm only interpreting here (not judging). But I think s/he means you're spending a lot of time justifying the position that expediency is what's important, which is ironic.
I see. I gave the explanation because I experienced it and understand where it comes from. I am not particularly affluent, and therefore I often need to make the 'best for the buck' decisions, that also includes buying books and whatnot. I know that had I been affluent, I'd spent more on my hobbies over minmaxing.
> Why are so many people upset by this?
> It’s like they have some kind visceral reaction to seeing someone who isn’t being thrifty and researching every little thing out with spreadsheets.
It doesn’t affect you. They’re not telling you to do it.
Would you pay $100 for a 100MB usb drive? Would you not react and try to dissuade a friend from making a purchase you recognize to be ill-considered?
It’s your money, do what you want, but people are upset because there are (probably, since we dont know yet) better options that don’t have an Apple pricetag. The purchase would be based on complacency with a brand, and not conformity to rational principles and knowledge.
Few have already posted that they would buy this because it’s Apple, in order to avoid 1-2 hours of research. I really hope these aren’t the same people complaining about how terrible capitalism is.
I mean that's basically Yubikey. There are cheaper alternatives for the actual product and a browser-based password manager and a sw authenticator on your phone gives you all the same phishing and security benefits for $0.
I'm not about to be upset that someone still wants a Yubikey though.
* Knowing little about headphones it would take me more than a couple hours to research properly
* I don’t enjoy this research. So unlike most leisure this could be evaluated as a time cost against other activities like working on my business, which translates into a money cost.
* There is a seamlessness when everything is apple. It all works very well together. Having another sort of device makes it the odd duck out and a source of friction even if it is superior on one or two metrics. These headphones will seamlessly switch between multiple devices and work with Siri/Apple music etc
* If there is ever a problem, Apple support is excellent and there are apple stores all over the world. I’m also in the stores reasonably often if I need to buy some other thing, check out a product or need servicing on another device. Apple also offers excellent mail service with premade labels and pickup. Servicing things is work, so this servicing convenience lowers the effective cost.
I won’t personally be buying the overear headphones. I really like my airpods and have tinnitus so I’m not sure I should be using noise cancellation. But hopefully the explanation above gives you some explanation of how buying an apple product can make more sense once you’re already in the ecosystem.
I think it just blows my mind because no part of his reason for buying it is "I want a pair of over ear headphones". Instead it's just "they make great quality stuff".
I've dug into headphone forums and bought audiophile style headphones that are generally liked by the community.
- Sennheiser HD650s
- Schiit DAC
- Schiit Amp
They sound good (price ~$500, more after the DAC/Amp), but the build quality of the HD650s is poor, they feel like plastic crap. The Schiit devices are really nice and I like them.
Sennheiser also differentiates one of their lower models simply by stuffing a piece of foam into the ear cup to make it sound worse and then sells it cheaper than a more expensive model with the same driver. I find this to be a pretty disgraceful way to differentiate.
I think these Apple headphones are probably a better overall product at a cheaper price point. They've improved the beats products and the build quality is better than Sennheiser.
Audio stuff has a lot of snake oil around it and (ironically) a lot of extreme anti-brand tribleness that I'd argue is more irrational than what the parent comments suggests about buying Apple stuff. (Hatred for bose for example).
I think it's more about signaling some sort of in-group status than about the products themselves.
All of that Sennheiser stuff is currently in a cabinet, because it's a hassle to use and Airpods/Beats studio work better day to day.
My brother spent $2,000 upgrading his golf clubs, and didn't improve his score at all. GP said he's willing to spend an extra $200 to avoid two hours of research. Most of us here make at least $100/hr. The opportunity cost alone makes the purchase reasonable.
$100 * 40 hours * 52 weeks = $208,000 per year. You may want to take a step outside the HN "bubble of people bragging about their salaries" and realize that this is NOT a common salary level. Most people make less than half that unless they live in SV (and even then, many are making <200k a year...)
I'd make a guess that majority of HN readers are located in SV (or work for SV companies). So for people who read this it probably is a common salary level.
> Why would you want these then? What about your current headphones isn't good enough that you are willing to pay $600?
Can't speak for others, but I simply want good quality over ear headphones for sitting at my desk listening to music while coding. I have a set of decent AKG over-ear headphones, but I'm tired of the cable and there are times when ANC would be nice. It would also be nice to have a set for watching TV in the evening.
Not sure why so many people have their panties in a twist about this. Apple makes arguably the best wireless tech in the business. People keep comparing these to high end wired headphones (without ANC) which completely misses the point.
> I mean, so would a really great pair of headphones that costs $200 less. Also, if you are giving out $600 headphones as gifts, I would like us to be friends.
Also, please get me a line on these wireless over ear headphones with good sound and ANC you can pick up for $200.
I'm guessing that would be the Sony XB-900N, the little brother of the 1000-XM3. The noise canceling isn't quite as good as the XM3/QC35, but it's close.
Edit: I should admit that you are correct that $200 (MSRP, not paid price) won't buy a fair competitor. More appropriate is $350, which is what the XM4/QC35 II cost.
> I should admit that you are correct that $200 (MSRP, not paid price) won't buy a fair competitor. More appropriate is $350, which is what the XM4/QC35 II cost.
It's good to have a realistic comparison. All these comments comparing it to wires, non ANC headphones, and studio monitor headphones are pretty far off base.
Honestly as someone with $4,000 in-ear headphones that are just beautiful, the AirPods are great. I mean, subjectively crappy on any 1 on 1 dimension vs some competitor on the audiophile forums, but they sync, charge fast, shift between devices, etc.
My usage is 50/50.
Plus, the old apple stuff was hilariously bad on certain sound things; but it’s clear they’ve focused on it, and usually that means it’s fine.
No doubt Apple will have made a great product but that doesn't oblige you to buy them! What would the Airpod Max bring you that your existing Airpod Pros don't? What problem will they solve? It sounds like you're just buying things because Apple decided to sell them.
Owning Apple gear signals status among a significant portion of the population. Maybe not for you, me or the majority of HN's clientele. But even for those who don't buy into this definition, adhering to it can still bring tactically social advantages.
I have a very hard time believing you're not aware of this, and feigning ignorance in order to criticize the fact is just disingenuous.
Then why did Apple lower the prices of iPhones, iPads, and MacBook Airs?
According to that link’s definition of a “Veblen” good, if Apple had raised prices, then demand would have increased. Either someone in charge of pricing Apple products missed out on huge revenue increases by failing to raise the price, or it’s not a Veblen good.
And there is no contention that the amortized cost of an iPhone SE, iPad Mini, or MacBook Air gets you the lowest cost to quality ratio of any competing product that also last the longest.
And the iPhone SE, iPad Mini, and MacBook Air are extremely competitively priced, especially if you amortize over their lifetimes versus competing products' lifetimes.
There isn't even a competing product for iPad Mini.
Maybe a case can be made for the highest end Apple products are Veblen goods, but that's a far less interesting comment than all Apple products are Veblen goods.
Veblen goods as defined on the Wikipedia page (Veblen himself is more careful) are a bit of a spook, a product which sells more every time the price is raised to no limit is of course impossible.
In contradiction to your post which I replied to, Apple has raised the price of their flagship iPad and iPhone, and continued to bust through sales records. That's Veblen enough for me.
They have also lowered the price of their most affordable product in a category, and in any case, this being tech, each new product isn't the same as the predecessor, which complicates the analysis.
I don't think "people buy the latest flagship iPhone because it's expensive" is as true for Apple as it is for, say, BMW.
But it's reasonably true, and there's a trope to go with it: Apple keeps releasing products where the commentariat say "that's so much money for an X! who is going to buy this?" and then sell millions of that product.
>In contradiction to your post which I replied to, Apple has raised the price of their flagship iPad and iPhone, and continued to bust through sales records. That's Veblen enough for me.
Seems like a useless concept to me. If the flagship phones are getting better and better each year, why is it noteworthy that the price might increase? Is there a business that sells a better product at the same price as an inferior product?
Waste. Physical electronic waste and opportunity cost.
For example, these cost more money than an average resident of Sierra Leone earns in a month. You could donate to feed their family.
Or for $550, you could spend $300 on buying a Kenyan family 5 sheep, $100 on gifting 5 Serbian women a month of literacy classes each, and $150 on 15 rides to school for refugee children in Egypt. Taxes not included.¹
Yes, this. However, maybe that is not a bad thing. Many purchasers will try these out in a store and be amazed by the incredible sound. Probably most will have never heard headphone sound of that quality. They will plunk down their card and bring them home. They will then enjoy an entirely new experience with all their favorite music and more. Given Apple's history of very high customer satisfaction numbers, most of these customers will have a positive, enjoyable experience and be happy with their purchase.
Could they have had a great listening experience with a more established audio name? Sure, but so what. Those companies failed to reach these customers. Apple will sell them a new listening experience (for them) and they will love it. If they don't love it, they will return the product. That's how it works. No good or evil, just products and customers. If the customers like them and find value Apple will sell a lot of headphones. If not, these will go on the trash heap of other failed Apple products. Customers always have the final say.
About the expensive part. In the grand scheme of things the iPhone is 1000+ EUR, with an extra 200 for AppleCare, a watch would be around 500 on top of that.
Adding 550 for something that will sit on one's head for hours and hours isn't outlandish in comparison.
I'm in the Pixel 4 / cheapish Sony headphones camp, but for people riding the high tide it doesn't look out of place pricing wise.
I can get behind this mentality. It's not mine, the only Apple products I owned were iPod nanos, and compared to what was on the market back then, they were really good.
Always trying to get the best for the smallest possible price starts to drain you. You get to a point where you say "I trust them and I can afford it" and that is ok. I wish I could do that.
> Always trying to get the best for the smallest possible price starts to drain you.
So true. I've been doing this lately, and have realized how mentally draining it really is to conduct exhaustive research to maximize the value/price you get for a product. Not to mention the time spent easily runs into the hundreds of dollars worth.
For enthusiasts it can be a joy to research a product. For example audiophiles with headphones. But for average consumers like me, just going with the expensive but safe option is on average a really good heuristic.
I'll have to say that the spatial audio stuff is friggin' cool in the AirPods Pro. This is a bit spicy for me in the $ department as I already have too many professional over-the-ear headphones. But, would be nice... Dammit. Don't make me do it! I haven't looked, but if this has spatial audio that is compatible with an upcoming AppleTV or something, I'd probably just say "ummm, yeah, I will not be putting any surround sound in this room and I'll just enjoy this movie with my headphones."
A proper surround setup (5.1 is more than enough for a mid-size room) or even Atmos speakers can be had for a reasonable price if you shop around. There's really no substitute (in my opinion) for the experience if you watch movies and have a compatible receiver/amplifier. A large and well-designed subwoofer is incredibly noticeable as well depending on your use case. It can easily sound better than the large majority of seats in your average theater which aren't ideally positioned without spending too much.
If all I did was watch Micheal Bay movies I guess I would agree. I have a very nice amp and speaker setup hooked up to my TV. It sounds fantastic.
I never turn it on, I use my TV speakers. Even with cinematic shows I find they mix the dynamic range so high that it's insufferably loud when something exciting happens, and then I can't hear anyone talk for the rest of the show. I'm constantly changing the volume.
I've been using my pairs of Grados and Sennheisers for 20 years each. The Grados were $200 and the Sennheisers were $150. Apple has never been known for hitting audiophile quality, so even though we don't have reviews yet, they likely don't sound as good. Your Apple headphones will be in the trash in a few years and mine will still be delivering wonderful sound.
Does this imply the majority of consumers care more about the brand perception than actual value?
I mean, we all know apple fan-bois are vividly after the apple logo, but come on, there's still the majority of sensible people who put actual value higher than the show-off effect.
Been using my Grado RS2 headphones for around 18 years. Their repair service is excellent! Also I expect each Grado headphone to have a overall lower carbon footprint.
I did notice the Apple website does not list the Frequency Response specs.
I got a free repair from Grado about 13 years ago when someone stepped on my headphones. Other than that I've just worn out the ear foams a few times which are 2 seconds to replace. They're also still made in Brooklyn!
I totally get how much engineering goes into the Apple products. There's also something beautiful about a completely passive headphone using a hundred year old connector technology made by a 67 year old company with a BIFL philosophy that is repairable and will never go obsolete. White and seamless is not the only kind of cool.
Edit: We've had to warn you about flamebait comments and personal attacks before. Continuing like this will get you banned. If you would please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use the site as intended, we'd appreciate it.
Edit: you've unfortunately been breaking the site guidelines a ton. We ban accounts that do that, because we're trying for something different on this site. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the intended spirit to heart when commenting here?
Well designed Bluetooth audio can be indistinguishable from wired. There needs to be good codec support on both ends and strong signal quality. All Bluetooth codecs are lossy, but the higher bitrate ones should not be perceptually different from lossless. Most of the problems with bad Bluetooth come from the SBC codec(degrades badly with low signal quality) or bad implementations. One advantage Apple has is that their AAC codec can transmit without any recompression if you are using an AAC source file. I have a Fiio Bluetooth dongle that uses LDAC with nice headphones and IEMs and I can absolutely not hear a difference with wired.
And by the way, the Bose and Sony's are considered top of the line for noise canceling wireless headphones. You absolutely lose sound quality from the noise canceling though, so that feature is a trade-off. Airpod Max may well be a contender, though it is not out yet, so it's premature to give it the noise canceling crown.
It's not strictly fair because you asked for 20 hours, and these do 30, so perhaps disqualified.
I use a similar model MPOW at home. They sound great! Not like audiophile perfect great, but good enough. I have a kid who likes to play with everything, so $500 headphones are a big no. I'm not arguing that these are dumb, or overpriced, or anything, I don't really care. But there are decent alternatives in this space already.
Sorry for double reply, I did not do heavy research but just going through Amazon’s recommendations and identifying good audiophile brands, here is what I found:
I really really don’t think Apple is going to make better headphones than Sennheiser and Shure, or even Sony. I’m particularly intrigued by the Sony XM4’s battery life of 30 hours, and 10 minute charge that gets it a 5 hour charge. The worst thing about all day use of wireless headphones is that it will just die on you if you have a podcast or music on in the background all day.
I used that guide a few months ago and bought the Bose NC 700, Wirecutter's recommended high-end option.
I've had a huge list of problems with it:
- The noise cancellation sets itself to maximum power every time you put it on and there's no way to completely turn off noise cancellation when using a computer; here's a thread of people complaining about it: https://community.bose.com/t5/Around-On-Ear-Headphones/NC-70...
- The only way to use it with no noise cancellation is to pair it with your phone, install the Bose app (there are three, make sure you use the right one), open the Bose app, find the settings which are not easy to find, and turn it off, and repeat this process EVERY TIME you use the headphones (there's plenty of lag in every step in this process, of course)
- It requires a Bluetooth connection to use the mic (the cable only supports speakers), which means I can't use it in Boot Camp because Boot Camp Bluetooth is currently broken
- It mispronounces my name every time I put it on, with no way to fix it, which gets very aggravating
- There's sometimes some weird static noise when connected to my Android phone, and they also automatically reconnect to my phone every time I turn it on, even after I manually disconnect it every time (my AirPods Pro don't do this so it's not just a problem all headphones share)
It's otherwise pretty good, but these flaws are really frustrating considering how much I paid for it.
The reason people are willing to pay more for Apple is because Apple products usually don't have problems like these.
How is it helpful to post an example of a buying guide for over the ear headphones? It solves the exact problem the OP pointed out: that they don't know what to buy and don't want to spend the time researching themselves. It gives you an answer right at the top of the page, from someone who did the research for you.
EDIT: would love to continue this conversation with those who replied to me but HN has decided I am "posting too fast" (my last post was an hour ago?) so... shrug.
There are many reasons why this doesn't work, at least sometimes.
First of all, you have to trust that the reviewer is truthful (this case, NY Times, might be given a pass).
So you either check a bunch of reviews and frequently come out more confused than going in, even as someone who's knowledgeable about the subject or you just buy something from a brand you already trust.
Secondly, the problem with reviews is that they're done by specialists. To give you an example for movies. I've watched some of the movies which are top rated by experts. Frequently I've found that I just don't like them. Too artsy. You know what they say about specialists: they know more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing. At some point specialists basically turn into aliens. Their tastes stop intersecting with those of the average J. Doe.
In many cases you just want a brain-dead solution to a problem because you're using your neurons for something else. And one of the safest brain-dead solutions is to go with a brand you already trust. Another one is to go with the crowd. Apple is kind of both.
And I say this as someone that generally avoids Apple products :-)
>nor do I want to invest any time learning about headphones
That categorically sounds like not wanting to read any such articles. I highly doubt the barrier is to do with Google skills or finding them in the first place. GP just doesn’t want to. Not to mention most people will not feel they have sufficiently researched a topic by reading the first piece they see.
Thanks, I suspected as much. I'd contend that I've done neither of those things but will instead take it as an opportunity to re-evaluate my choice in even spending time here. Time to sign out, I think.
What's crazy is you can go get tampons jammed in your ears, have an audiologist fill them with silicon goop, send said silicon off to a high end company, and they'll mail you back the finest of IEMs your ears will ever hear for less than this. They're so comfortable and natural feeling you'll forget they're in... All for less than $400 all in. Pro tip, if you're a Costco member the impressions are already paid for in your membership. Or if you know somebody that'll let you in the store....
But there's a fatal flaw. These glorious masterpieces that fit your body perfectly come with a horrific subatomic nanotechnology called 1/8" jack. And while all phones are thicker than that, one cannot simply set that example for children.
Please think of the children.
Also Alclair audio makes some dank shit for half the price. They'd love your business.
I love the endless comparisons to products which don't actually compete with these or even the AirPods. If you are looking at AirPods Max, your tampon headphones aren't remotely in the running for no other reason than they are wired. That's without even looking at the other features of the headset.
Good bluetooth headphones finally have completely destroyed my willingness to wrestle with cables.
Not to mention the better than Bluetooth things Apple are doing. Seamlessly switching between devices, etc. I, for one, have never wanted form fitting ear buds more than a good wireless experience.
I would love both, but AirPods are close enough on fit for me personally (lucky) that I can wear them on long mountain bike rides. Any kind of wired headphone gets caught on a branch or my hand or something else catches on.
Obviously the AirPods Max aren't coming on any bike rides either, but when I'm at my desk I prefer over ear headphones or speakers. (But I'm probably not buying the Max either)
It is a cool idea in concept and when I was flying I looked into getting some.
As I mention above, wires are a no-go for me at this point. Both while coding at my desk (where I would use something like the Max) and while out and about riding my bike, they are too big of a headache.
Find your nearest “audiologist” or “audiology center” and ask them if they do “ear impressions for custom-fit in-ear monitors and earplugs”.
Do not buy headphones until you’ve discussed your product choice with them. You may find that they can be fit correctly but will have a huge unsightly bulge outside the ear canal. They will usually have Opinions, as it’s their job. Know your price range.
There’s no other way to do it but to go somewhere in person and have a cup of liquid goo poured into each of your ears by a trained professional. (Do not try this at home, etc.) They will send the molds off to be fit into your earphones, which either you’ll buy new from them or turn over to the audiologist at impressions time.
You can also use the mold to produce musician’s earplugs that are transparent and have swappable filters that have different dB reductions. I use my -9dB pair for parties so I can hear better.
I assume they keep the mold on file for a little while, in case of fit issues or whatever, but it’s been a decade since I last went so I don’t imagine they still have it. (Who knows, though!)
When you have them in hand, turn your volume way down and be very, very careful with them. You are sticking these deeper into your ear than headphones have ever gone before. You can go deaf very rapidly. If your phone has a volume limit setting, enable it and turn it the lowest point (75dB on iPhone). If you’re constantly wishing it was louder after a day or two, raise it 5dB and wait a bit longer. The audiologist will make scary comments about risk of hearing damage, and give you a hearing test to see how you’re doing beforehand. Listen to them. It’s deadly serious stuff.
IEMs are very-high-end personal monitors that are custom molded to your body to fit perfectly in your ear canal. Your ear canals on your left and right side are different sizes and shapes, so you'll have quite a bit of difference between them.
Most importantly, rather than using speakers like headphones, they use a technology called balanced armature drivers which have incredible properties.
An example manufacturer is https://alclair.com I have two sets of theirs, one for master studio tracks, and another for live music that's more geared for guitar and bass playing.
They block out nearly all outside noise, some up to 28db of protection, which is wonderful.
Yeah you can also get a TV for under $400. You could get a decent hotel for the weekend in many places for under $400 all-in! You could adopt a puppy, or fall in love, for free. Why would anybody buy these headphones instead??!
You can also get both the Sony 1000XM4, the current best noise-cancelling overear wireless headphones, and the Sennheiser HD560s and still have $60 left.
This might be the first music product from Apple that I would be skipping. Spatial audio needs to come to Apple TV and the MacBooks before these become worthy of price. And major services need to implement it.
Netflix on Mac with Spatial audio with nothing inside my ear would be worth $549 to me.
Other comments are suggesting the tech in these may be for upcoming AR tech. I could see the price making more sense with a “killer app” for the added tech.
I mean I will have to wait to see them in person but tbh they look pretty ugly, like a no-name luxury headphone you would see at bestbuy for $70 marketed to a female market.
The price point is ridiculous but the Bose go for like $350? so I can see it I guess. Will have to wait till reviews. For me on quality to buy they would have to compete the entry level prosumer stuff HD-650 etc. But they are closed back, active noise canceling so it is a completely other market that I don't even have headphones in.
For walking on the street or in a plane I am into chi-fi IEMs that are like $35 and compete with $500 stuff and just block out the sound through isolation.
These are almost so plain looking they stand out. I wonder if that's what they were going for, since they could've easily stuck an apple logo in all that empty space.
I'm sure this will go like any other apple product release - the internet will make fun of it but in real life it successfully becomes a fashion statement.
I mean true. These will be the biggest selling $500 headphones just because they are from Apple and people who never thought of buying $500 headphones are the people who are going to buy these, not people who are high quality audio hobbyists. They will try and get them on the heads of athletes getting off the plane just like Beats etc...
One thing to note is that Apple is using a different pricing strategy in headphones then with their traditional products. They are pricing them higher, but are offering very deep discounts on sale. For example, AirPods and AirPods Pro sold with 30% discount everywhere past Black Friday. This would translate to a sub $400 price point on sale for the max, which put them in line with the competition from Bose and Sony.
> AirPods Max come with a soft, slim Smart Case that puts AirPods Max in an ultralow power state that helps to preserve battery charge when not in use.
This is a bit confusing, why would you need an ultralow power state for your headphones? Is this just so you don't have to turn them on and off? It seems less convenient to put them in and out of a bag than to just turn them off (and preferably fold them) when you're not using them if you need to stretch the battery life.
I'm guessing the case has a magnet that tells the headphones to turn off completely, instead of being in standby looking for a sensor to indicate you have put them on.
I agree though that the case doesn't seem like the best way to accomplish it. Put a switch on them, or allow them to fold in such a way that the folding/unfolding can power on the device.
I worry this will drive up prices in the headphone market. Sennheiser and other players may see that there's way more money to be made by simply marking up what they have.
1. You are assuming these don't offer a better experience than Sennheisers et al. and that the only reason they are more expensive is "because Apple". Maybe true, but also hard to justify contextually given Apple just released the best bang-for-your-buck laptop on the market.
2. The audio market is pretty competitive. If Sennheisers up their prices without improving anything, someone else (with equivalent quality) will come along at Sennheiser's old price point. I know I just bought some $50 noice-cancelling headphones that work for my purposes (and have USB-C fast charging).
This, please. Every time they run down to ten percent it's like being stabbed in the eardrum.
I bought a pair of Sony WH-1000XM4s on sale a month or two ago in large part for the 30-hour battery life (yes I could use wired headphones and have an infinite-hour runtime; I have a very nice pair of Sennheisers for that. I don't always want to).
Or just make it like a quarter of its current volume. I don’t think there’s been a single time that fucking notification went off where it didn’t make me physically jolt in my chair.
Indeed. Every time Teenage Engineer comes out with something that isn't a synth, the comments section on IG is always "No one will buy this over prices junk" - go to the website: Sold Out.
> AirPods Max are available to order starting today for $549 (US) from apple.com and in the Apple Store app in the US and more than 25 other countries and regions. AirPods Max will begin shipping on Tuesday, December 15.
Edit: After AppleCare, optional 3.5mm cable, and tax, it comes out to just over $700 USD.
"Hey, cool, something not in-ear, this could be just what I was looking for."
See's price: Nope... I'll stick with what I've got for now.
Those are some of the most expensive headphones I've ever seen and I thought Bose's QC3's at $350 were overpriced. This kicks it up a notch further. I'll be curious what the reviews show for sure, but too rich for my blood.
Oh, I know there's more expensive out there, I should've been more clear, when I said "Some of the most expensive" I actually meant outside of the crazy cans that people buy that call themselves audiophiles lol.
if you are looking for an over the ear, top notch, bluetooth headset, i would recommend the Sony's XM4. i have a pair, they are amazing -- the noise cancelling is so good, it kind of gives me a bit of vertigo.
Guess it’s going to at least somewhat depend on how important spatial audio turns out to be. My QC35s are on their last legs, and I’m certainly pretty curious about these having just ordered some AirPod Pros...
Just a heads up, Bose often give you a discount, or did when I last worked for them about a decade ago, if you trade in your old headphones for new ones.
If it's just the ear pads, those can be replaced for like $20.
I think these look beautiful and are likely well constructed. The lack of a standard 3.5 mm audio jack is disappointing for a product in this class, but to be expected from Apple.
The questions will be sound quality. A lot of people on here are already stating that they don't know why anyone would buy this product when they can get better sounding products for a similar price. I don't know how anyone can know how good these sound yet. I personally assume these will sound quite good as Apple has made a number of nice sounding products over the years. With that being said, at $550 it is competing with audiophile grade headphones so it needs to at least be roughly in that class.
If it is even roughly in the ballpark of other $500 headphones it is going to be a no-brainer for a lot of people due to the integration with the Apple ecosystem and the stylishness of the build.
>The lack of a standard 3.5 mm audio jack is disappointing for a product in this class, but to be expected from Apple.
They quietly released a lightning to 3.5mm audio jack cable today to go with these, for use with legacy gear. It's $35 and is somewhat over-engineered (allows bi-directional usage, containing both an ADC and a DAC).
Interestingly, that cable seems to use a 3-conductor (TRS) 3.5mm connector as opposed the usual 4-conductor one found on EarBuds. So I guess that implies it doesn't carry mic input?
It's an unusual cable in that it's bidirectional, but it's not full duplex. So there's no mic input, but you can use it for both audio input and output (e.g., plane audio jack to headphones OR iPhone to vintage car head unit).
I strongly suspect a lightning-to-lightning connection (e.g., headphones to iPhone) would be full duplex though.
I'm fairly confident I've reached my own personal peak for Apple pricing. As a spectator I've no doubt these will sell massive numbers but I'm curious to learn what the market will bear for Apple's products.
$549 today isn't as much as $549 was 10 years ago or even 5 years ago. The world is getting wealthier. Money is getting cheaper. We've just printed trillions of dollars this year to keep the good times rolling baby. We live in an era where people would rather pay $549 for a set of headphones than save it in a bank account or save for a house, cuz there's no way in hell they'll ever be able to afford a house. So why not blow it on experiences and shiney stuff instead of clinging on to a dream that can never be realised? That's the mentality of a lot of Apple's target market.
meanwhile the last time the federal minimum wage was raised was in 2009, to $7.25 an hour. At that rate, you'd need to work ~76 hours to afford these headphones.
From a company that priced a monitor stand at $1000, this is at least more functional. But for most people, a pair of $30 headphones will be just as good, albeit without the status symbol element.
I'd agree regarding the $1000 monitor stand not being targeted - but they're wireless headphones - Apple sells consumer electronics. of course they're targeted, at least for desirability (not so much price point)
And my reply was mainly to highlight the parent comment of
> The world is getting wealthier. Money is getting cheaper. We've just printed trillions of dollars this year to keep the good times rolling baby
does not actually reflect the reality of most workers; who's purchase power has only decreased.
For comparison, Sony's WH-1000XM4 which are currently widely considered the state of the art in the active noise cancelling over-ears, will cost you anywhere between $300-$400 depending on where you are.
(I was very surprised the price can vary that widely, actually. On Sony's US page they're $279, while in the EU they're €380 which is about $460.)
~always. It's illegal to quote prices to consumers for most things ex VAT in the EU (you're allowed show the ex VAT price, but you must show the inc VAT price as the primary price).
Thanks for this insight, I was not aware of this difference. As far as I can see though, this doesn't account for the drastic difference, given the average sales tax in the US is roughly 7% [0][1]. On top of the $279, the price would then end up at about $300.
Depends on where you live. Some states don't have VAT ("sales tax" in the US), others do, still others have higher sales tax depending on the city you're in.
I bought the M3 right when they came out for about 320€ (I think they were 380 but there was a deal). And got a reimbursement about a year later because of technical problems. Because I really liked them I bought them again and the price then was about 180€.
And I’d say the M4 don’t add so much to warrant the difference over the M3 at their current pricing.
In any case, Apples product will never see deals remotely close to this. (Maybe 50€ off if the stars are perfectly aligned)
My experience with the WH-1000XM3 was awful. Sound cancel feature wasn't that great, couldn't pair with multiple devices at the same time and have the audio switch seamlessly between the two, and I also didn't want to have to trust Sony with my listening data. Call me paranoid if you'd like, but smart headphones are basically pumping out information about what we're listening to or hearing around us, and if I was going to trust any corporation to be user-centric on privacy in this regard it'd be Apple.
If Apple's headphones have high audio quality and a seamless experience across multiple devices and cool features prepping the way for VR/AR (the way other comments have suggested) then I'd buy a pair.
I'm not expecting anything to happen, but advocating for user privacy isn't about having anything to hide or expecting anything to happen. As far as I'm concerned, the most rational position is to expect user privacy as a primary feature of any services/products we use, particularly if they don't need to be relaying any data in the first place.
I mean, perhaps if Facebook made a pair of headphones would you accept that it's not quite tinfoil hat stuff to be interested in user privacy? We should never trust any centralized authority or corporation with data if we can help it.
I’ve been hovering on the XM4s waiting for these to be announced. I very much like my regular AirPods, but at £549 I’m definitely going to get the Sonys for £349.
I’m sure the AirPods will be more convenient in some ways, but as I’ll be using them almost entirely inside the house, I’m willing to forego that considering the huge price difference. I much prefer the visual style of the Sonys too; not that that matters all that much.
I’m interested to see reviews of the AirPods to see what they’re like on the sound quality front though.
The only real inconvenience is Bluetooth connecting and disconnecting. It's clunky on my WH-1000XM3's compared to my AirPods Pro, and I often find myself hunting for the device the Sonys were last connected to so I can reconnect to something else. But, unless the AirPods Max (terrible name) turn out to be stunningly good, the added convenience isn't worth the massive price difference to me.
i had both the sony wh-1000xm4 and now use the sennheiser momentum 3. via bluetooth i have the same problem on both my macbook pro and iphone: they lag. i watch a youtube video (on ios in the app; on osx browser or a video app) and the sound is a few ms behind (very noticeably though).
any idea what's going on there and/or if apple would solve this somehow with airpods max?
I think that's some iOS peculiarity, or non-standard latency compensation implementation. On Android all bluetooth headphones I've tried seem to work fine for non realtime applications, and many (like Sony's great wf-1000xm3) have none or barely perceptible latency in games.
Especially if you consider the inherent issues with Bluetooth call quality. No matter how good their microphones in them are, they will mangle the audio back to the 90s.
$549 seems entirely detached and I am baffled, even as an ANC enthusiast.
Have you used Bluetooth headphones this decade? And airpods in particular? There’s not really any problem with audio quality they sound pretty much indistinguishable from wired headphones in real world use (sure if you’re sitting alone in a quiet room with an audiophile setup listening to FLAC files because 320kbps mp3s aren’t high quality enough, then you may want something else).
This is just demonstrably not true. Bluetooth Hands-Free mangles the sample rate to 16 / 24 kHz. See this video for a collection of pretty much all common devices from "this decade". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifmGS_WWk7o
I use FaceTime Audio for calls to family because it sounds so much better than VoLTE. FT Audio sounds like you're in the same room as the person, even over non-Pro Airpods.
I have a co-worker who moved from Bose to AirPods. I wish he still had the Bose headphones - he sounded better, and they filtered out his swallowing noises.
Yeah, they use their own proprietary protocol over Bluetooth Low Energy (which you can basically use as a raw packet transport).
For some reason the Bluetooth consortium was years behind the ball in standardizing a high quality bidirectional audio transport, versus the phone-quality "Hands Free Profile" and "Headset" Profile using 90s era codecs (uni-directional is fine since it uses a higher quality "Advanced Audio Distribution" profile).
The consortium launched Bluetooth Low Energy audio last year (or maybe this year?), but I'm not sure if it's actually shipping in anything yet.
Yeah, whenever I use Bluetooth headphones that have a microphone with my PC I have to be sure to disable all of the headset profiles so it doesn't switch to dial-up quality as soon as an app requests microphone access.
I'm skeptical if the protocol makes that much difference, the experience with Beats X basically felt the same as any normal BT headphones, AirPods definitely felt less fussy and more seamless despite them both using the same W1 chip.
My theory is the AirPods start getting ready for syncing as soon as you open the case/detects you touching them, while the Beats X had a traditional on button and were entirely unimpressive to me.
I was referring more to audio quality. Airpods seems to be able to act in headset mode (audio + microphone) without killing the quality of the audio you are listening to. Most headphones switch to a very low bitrate mode when you activate the microphone.
I did hear Rumours (I never looked into it) that there will be an upcoming feature in bluetooth that will allow for higher quality. I believe currently the tradeoff is audio quality vs latency. My bluetooth headphones (Sony) switch between high quality but ~500ms latency (guess), to low quality but no noticeable latency when doing calls.
True, Bluetooth 5.2 is introducing LE Audio that will use a new codec (LC3) and should enable higher audio quality also for calls when microphone from the headset is in use.
Yep. Time and time again I see people abuse their credit cards to buy iPhones or Galaxy Notes. And then complain when unexpected events throw then into an evergrowing interest snowball.
Financial education should be taught in elementary school.
"Headphones" is plural. The "phone" bit refers to the actual drivers, of which there are at least two in a pair of stereo headphones. That's why we say a pair of headphones.
With regular AirPods, they work individually. You don't have to use both. So it's helpful to think in terms of each one being its own thing, even though they're paired.
I'd add that over-the-ear (so, one item) "headphones" have a similar issue as AirPods Max. I'd probably call two of these products "two pairs of AirPods Max." (Well, actually I'd probably just say 'two pairs of headphones' but that's a dodge.)
In context they treat Airpods as plural, using "are" over "is". It makes sense because the originals were plural, separate objects.
>I saw two AirPods Maxes
It is a compound noun, the base word gets pluralized, so it would still be Airpods Max. Like the plural of cup of tea is cups of tea, or sergeants major, brothers-in-law, courts martial, passersby. Airpods would be the base word.
AirPods is the product line name. Max is the model. So you have AirPods, AirPods Pro, and AirPods Max. If you needed to buy 10 of these you would say your were buying 10 pairs of AirPods, AirPods Pros, or AirPods Maxes.
Honestly though, it's English we're dealing with, so there are more exceptions than rules, anyway. Muddy the waters further with proper nouns and branding considerations and basically the only people who can tell you what is "right" would be Apple's marketing dept.
Interesting choice of 40mm driver instead of 50mm.
That can make a mass-ive difference in sense of realism for lows. Perhaps they think the Adaptive EQ makes up for it.
I’ve been disappointed in headphones that aren’t 50mm for electronica, jazz, pop, movies, and gaming, fine with 40mm for classical, choral, and television.
Is there still no visual indicator that the wearer is in transparency mode? I am frequently in situations where I'm out in public and something warrants saying, where one or both of us are wearing airpods. Transparency mode would be worth so much more if other people were able to see that I can hear them, and vice versa. There have been so many improvements to apple devices which are obvious to anyone with an eye for what's missing but for which we've had to wait 5-10 years before they materialize, if ever. I am resigned to this being something I can look forward to in 2030.
That price is ... insane. I think the only saving grace will be spatial audio and if it's waterproof. They also seem a bit, well, ugly for an Apple product.
I was patiently waiting for these. I bought (and loved) the original AirPods. I really wanted noise cancellation for flights, but the AirPods Pro hurt my ears no matter what I tried. I waited through each Apple "one more thing," hoping these would surface. I eventually went with Sony's WH-1000XM4s. The Bluetooth is a little slow, but they're pretty stellar otherwise.
I don't see a mention of any socket, mini jack or micro jack; this is predictable but still unfortunate. I wish it was possible to use these with non bluetooth gear.
Update: I see a mention of the lightning connector (for charging) at https://www.apple.com/airpods-max/specs/ . I wonder if lightning to mini jack adapter would work with this product.
> AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
I think it's a shame these don't support the new MagSafe charger. Plugging a cable into headphones is more of a pain than it needs to be. Charging my AirPods Pro by putting it on the MagSafe puck is really convenient, and makes me more likely to charge them from time to time than to wait until they're dead to plug them in.
I have no idea what they sound like, but they look incredible. I doubt I'll buy them at that price, but I am happy to see that people are designing these kinds of things.
I'm secure enough with my masculinity that I don't mind carrying something that looks like a purse if it were useful.
But I'd never want to carry my headphones in my hand. When not in use, when I'm out (say I'm about to check-out at the grocery store and don't want to be rude), they hang on my neck. I'm not going to want to carry around an empty carrying case at the same time that I'm using my device so that I can neatly put it away when NOT in use. Maybe overnight, if there's some benefit?
I suppose if they were in a suitcase, it could prevent damage? But airports are one of the main places I love over-the-ear headphones, so they wouldn't be in my bag. Also, if in a bag, you wouldn't want the carrying strap because it just adds bulk.
If you are not from that time, airpod looking ugly and weird was the common theme among most the reviews. Then somehow they became status symbol. There was some video or some blog which argues that Apple making weird looking products intentionally, as they want to use that as symbol rather than some other competition like product.
Eh... airpods look weird, but they're also fairly discrete. You notice the little stems, but they're easy to ignore. This is a pretty big honking device.
I'm not sure I buy airpods are a status symbol either in most people's eyes either. I like airpods, but does anyone really make a judgement based on choice of earbud? I doubt it.
"Ugly" was my immediate impression too. The band looks like a 1980s era idea of futuristic, with a pair of oversized Apple Watches stuck on each end.
I wasn't a fan of the Airpod aesthetic either, but they made a bit of sense, because they seemed like a reasonable evolution from 15 years of marketing around their iPod/iPhone headphone cables.
If I buy these, it’ll be in addition to my “stuff in pocket and go” headphones. I listen to music while working literally all day, and my needs for the item that provides that is pretty different from what I want at the gym or if I am meeting a friend and want something for the journey.
For anyone having doubts about the design and maybe attributing it to Apple tendency to predate or establish trends, just look at the case that these come with. It looks absolutely hideous and just... tacky. TACKY. This isn't Ive's product, that's for sure.
Actually I'm surprised nobody's asking about a wired headphone jack. Without one, you won't be able to watch movies on planes, which is a pretty significant use case for over-the-ear noise-cancelling headphones. Probably gaming as well -- I don't do a ton of gaming, but StarCraft basically doesn't work over Bluetooth (probably due to buffering requirements).
Apple rolled out a low-latency audio feature a few weeks ago -- if you have a HomePod/pair of HomePods set as your primary output on your ATV4K, they're able to stay in sync with the TV even when you're doing something where any audio latency would be noticeable. For example, if I'm streaming a game from my PC, video and audio are in lockstep (which you wouldn't expect to see normally, since the audio would get 1-2s of buffer from the video) and there's no noticeable input latency (which you'd see if the device was holding back the video to build an audio buffer).
I was talking about watching movies on the seat-back in-flight entertainment system. I don't those will connect to bluetooth headphones yet -- at least not on the class of seat that I buy. :-)
Mac/iOS-only rules these out for me before I even get to the price. I still believe in an open ecosystem for audio, and have the desire and need to use headphones on ANY equipment I choose.
I use cans for video calls primarily, with listening second. Personal favourite is the original Sony MDR-1000X - they just work, and work anywhere, and have a cable if the battery dies. ANC is good enough. Sound quality is good enough. I'll buy a newer model when they cease to function.
I also have a pair of PowerBeats Pro, and they are mediocre. Left only changes half the time. Audio quality middling. Ignoring the lack of ANC, they weren't worth the expense and poor value. It's left me with the impression that Apple/Beats haven't got a clue about sound reproduction.
I also use Audio-Technica ATH-50 headphones, but rarely because no mic. Clear but too sterile except as studio monitors.
Also a set of Y50s that were inexpensive but served well for lightweight on the go sound/voice. Better than the Beats that came after them.
Price is not a good indicator when so much is spent on marketing.
You can use them as Bluetooth headphones or via the Lightning-to-3.5mm cable.
I doubt anyone will buy any of the Apple audio products specifically for non-ecosystem devices. My guess is more folks decide to leave the ecosystem and end up using them elsewhere down the road.
Yes these are expensive, but I understand that these will work seamlessly with your iphone, macbook etc. Compared to my bluetooth Sony headphones, where pairing is always hit and miss, I can see why someone wearing headphones all day and tranistioning between apple devices would see this as a reasonable purchase.
Plus you get the virtue signalling of being "rich"
This is the only reason I'm interested in buying these despite the price. Pairing my original Bose QC35's to my Apple devices is annoying and sometimes requires a seperate app all together just to get to work. Seamless pairing across all of my devices is a huge plus for me.
>spatial audio tracks the motion of a user’s head as well as the device, compares the motion data, then remaps the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves.
Emperors clothes. The audio is already anchored to the device, since the device emits the audio. And the device is (presumably) anchored to the wearers head by friction. so...
In a real surround sound setup you can turn your head and look at the speakers when they make an unexpected noise. It would be cool if these headphones did that too
It’s hard to judge the price accurately without also knowing how long these will last before they need to be disposed of due to the wear and tear caused by regular use.
If they cost $550 and last 1-2 years, that’s quite different from them costing $550 and lasting 3-5+ years.
Edit: Relevant, AirPods Max Ear Cushions are attached magnetically, and replacements will cost $70.
> Using the gyroscope and accelerometer in AirPods Max and iPhone or iPad, spatial audio tracks the motion of a user’s head as well as the device, compares the motion data, then remaps the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves.
I'm not sure I want this? What does this actually mean?
It's actually a nice feature that has been available on Airpods Pro as well. The feature makes it feel like the sound is actually coming out of the iPhone / iPad / etc. When you turn your head, the sound source stays the same.
Note that the Airpods don't actually know where your device is located. It simply sets a "base orientation" when the sound is started. This base orientation is updated when you keep your head in a new position for a longer time ("resetting" the approximated position of your device).
When you play back Dolby Atmos material, this feature sort of emulates having a surround sound system. So, even though you only have two earbuds, sounds do seem to be around you (coming from behind etc.) And if you move your head, the sound source stays the same, enhancing the illusion that there are 5 speakers around you and if you move, the sound changes.
The emulation is convincing and well executed, but it is still just a gimmick that only really works when playing back Dolby Atmos movies.
What "the point" of headphones is, is of course subjective. But I'm going to guess that for most people, the point of using headphones is have their audio portable and/or to not disturb other people. I don't think many people use them because they explicitly like the experience of audio playing "between the ears".
As to "why", people might actually prefer the (emulated) experience of a point sound source, as it could closer resemble talking to someone physically present (calls) or listening to a live performance.
Imagine wearing them, watching a tv show on your ipad. When you turn your head, it still seems like the sound is coming from the direction of your ipad.
Also used for surround sound, so if you turn your head, the "center channel" still is focused on the screen, and surround sound is where it would be if there were actual speakers behind you.
Could be fun playing a gyroscopically controlled video game on an iPad. You'd turn your body to the right, the in-game camera would pan to the right, and so would your ear's position within the sound scape. I'd imagine that could have quite an immersive effect.
Reading this I imagined that if you start listening somewhere and move, it simulates distancing from the imaginary sound source (which of course doesn't make any sense). So if you go out of the room with your headphones on, you won't hear the music anymore haha
It will sound like the band is physically located in front of you even when you turn your head.
The same way when you’re outside and you hear a car, and you turn away from the car the sound dampens. The same will be true of music played through these headphones.
I believe the spatial audio feature is only for supported video playback (eg. some content from Disney+, Apple TV+). It’s surprisingly immersive actually.
I think it means that if you move your head within a 3D sound space it'll sound as though you've turned your head relative to the source. The source being some sound emitter on the sound stage (not the iPhone).
Spatial Audio also emulates having more than just stereo headphones. So, if the 5.1 soundtrack dictates that a sounds starts behind you and moves forward, SA will emulate that using software tricks.
It's a well executed feature with a extremely limited scope/use case. I would not base headphone purchasing decisions on its availability.
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only person in tech who doesn't like over the ear headphones. I've always preferred earbuds, and fortunately, both iterations of Airpods fit my ears great. I also have never worked in an environment where I need to shut the world out just to get things done.
This isn't the main benefit, of course, but I do like that as a bonus my current over-the-ear headphones keep my ears warm during winter. There are cheaper ways of solving that problem, which is why I describe it as a bonus, but it's top of mind because it's cold today where I live.
And while it's not a benefit this year for me, I also like them on flights.
A few months ago, I experienced sort of an inflection point regarding the love I had for Apple products when my iPhone broke for no reason whatsoever: it worked perfectly during the day, no physical scratch or anything, woke up and I noticed that the phone was hot, i opened it, tried to close some apps and I noticed that it's quite slow. I opened the settings and kept getting notification popups regarding storage and saying that the storage is full. I decided to reboot, and the iPhone did not start after that. No reboot, restore, no safe recovery, nothing worked. Took it to Apple Support, told me the same things I found online "hardware failure" and proposed to "fix" it by buying a new phone of the same (2.5 year old) model for $570.
Nope.
I'll never buy an 'un-repairable' headset for $549.
Sounds like the APFS issues I have been having on my iMac. Once the disk is full, the device won't boot anymore. Removing files doesn't work "rm: disk is full". The only solution is to format the drive and start over. Have you tried DFU restore, if that's even a thing anymore?
Not sure this is the weakest link in value-for-money for Apple products. Like many people I know, my iPhones have been changed for no fee, outside warranty, for minor or major issues.
I'd say it's more about Apple moving from a yearly/bi-yearly iPhone renewal goal to a 2-3 years calendar, with now lucrative gadgets to buy in between. Fine by me: just get the long lasting core products and then pick what you want/need.
> proposed to "fix" it by buying a new phone of the same (2.5 year old) model for $570.
My first gen MacBook Air's display (the LED backlight to be precise) broke down due to coffee spill. Took it to Apple store, the estimated repair price was almost twice the original purchase price MacBook Air. I didn't know what to say!
I have the DT 770 Pro, which I'm not sure they still make anymore, and it has been a ten year love affair. I am reliably informed that you can, as the grandparent says, replace most parts of them, but I have never needed to - they are very, very robust. Mine do look a little dog-eared but honestly nothing most people would worry about. And, obviously, they sound great.
549$ for a new pair of headphones, so in India its probably going to release at 750$. I am currently using wireless earphones worth 30$. I am coming to the realization that I will probably never be able to afford many Apple products considering the way they price them.
This is simply astounding!
At this point, Apple has to be the most successful company (i.e. brand) in the world (and history)?
I am simply amazed. I cannot stand the company, their fans, or their products, but you got to give credit where credit is due.
They have managed to turn a tech company in to a luxury fashion company. That is every entrepreneur's wet dream.
You keep getting away with customers like a bandit and people will still happily buy it.
Just look at the people commenting in this thread where people are honestly admitting to paying a $200 markup just because it is Apple and they "trust" them, for a product they don't even know if they need.
Amazing, to be able to achieve something like this is really wow...
My AirPods died recently. At $159 and 2 years of aggressive usage (probably 3-4 hours every average day), I think they paid nicely for their price. That should average for around $0.06/hour. If these have the same lifespan, they should average to $0.2/hour. A bit steep for me to "just buy it" or not consider other brands. But I'll wait for the reviews, it might be a good deal.
Interestingly, I can't find any information on how much the batteries could last. This is basically the lifetime of your AirPods Max since (I guess) you won't be able to change the batteries.
+: also, these doesn't replace the AirPods but complement them. So it's more like $250+550 now.
These should compare to the AirPods and also they are not wireless. In that regard, if I compare them to the AirPods, then Apple pricing is competitive.
> My AirPods died recently. At $159 and 2 years of aggressive usage (probably 3-4 hours every average day), I think they paid nicely for their price. That should average for around $0.06/hour.
They'll still end up in a landfill somewhere. The batteries aren't replaceable, which makes them purely consumable with a 2-3 years lifespan at best (tiny ass batteries + heavy usage = multiple cycle a day).
Spending $549 on a battery powered gadget which will cycle several times a week and for which you can't get a battery replacement is such a weird move to me. This is peak planned obsolescence, battery powered + non serviceable should be an instant red flag to anyone.
For comparison, my dt770 and shure se215 are going on their 6th years with no sign of ageing whatsoever.
I paid some $350 for the latest and great Sony wireless headphones earlier in the year, that I returned a week later. Why? Because they were not polished. For example, pairing to both my laptop and my phone at the same time was a nightmare. I could not listen to music on my laptop and instantly receive phone audio if someone called me. I also could not listen to music on my laptop, then close the laptop and resume music on my phone with instant playback.
I also found the Sony privacy policy on the headphones to be lackluster. If the Apple headphones are more privacy conscious and also make this experience across devices as seamless as they're promising, I'll pay for them.
With all due respect, why do I need to care?
This post is about AirPods.
I have Sennheisers. Should I write about their up- and down-sides too? What about Bowers and Wilkinsons owners? What about Bose owners?
I think we all know that Apple comes nowhere new the quality of these brands. Could we please focus on the actual topic of the post here?
I'm summarizing my perspective on the AirPods Max and their price tag and on which conditions I'd be willing to purchase them, by comparing Apple's claims about them to specific problems I had elsewhere.
Just to follow up - as I think the person above was a bit harsh:
I am a Bowers and Wilkins user and have the same pain points as you, it's a recurring and daily issue that I'll listen to audio from a home based device (laptop, iPad) and then have to unpair/re-pair to my phone when I leave the house.
As a seamless wireless experience it falls short as it would be faster to have a wired set and simply plug it in to the device.
Same again when I come home and want to switch back. Apple cleanly solves this.
Whether that is worth a £200 premium on top of what I paid for my current cans is debatable, however if they can match or outperform the current NC family (PX, Bose QC, Sony MX4) I will be seriously considering them as my next pair
Much more important than price for me is comfort. These are whopping 50% heavier than Sony MXs, which I already rarely use because of the weight on the top of my head. The mesh looks like a definite improvement (the Sony’s top cushion gets hot from the pressure on my hair), but I doubt that will make up the huge difference.
So this is first gen and is likely going to see a ton of improvement. I would:
1) drop the crown, just like on the Watch it will likely lead to accidental changes of volume and is kinda gimicky
2) replace metal with light solid plastic
Next gen should tought “Half of the weight of previous generated for unprecendeted comfort”
I've spent a lot of money on earphones over the last 10 years in order to try to find a pair that doesn't suck. Audio quality is perhaps fourth on the list of deciding factors. It doesn't matter how good headphones sound if they are painful to wear, have impractical misfeatures or are too expensive.
If these fit my head and I can wear them for 12 hours straight, they may be worth the money. I'd pay $550 for that.
However, this is Apple. Which means it is likely they will find some clever way of making these headphones obsolete. Or they will break in some unfixable, or expensive to repair, way.
> However, this is Apple. Which means it is likely they will find some clever way of making these headphones obsolete. Or they will break in some unfixable, or expensive to repair, way.
It's Apple -- they'll keep iterating on it, come out with a better model at the same price at right around the same time the battery wear in your current model will make you choose between an expensive battery replacement or just getting the new version.
Honestly I was disappointed as hell with my airpods. I have to re-pair them every time I use them (often multiple times.) no matter if its with a mac, an android phone, a linux pc, or whatever. its pairing sucks. if anyone wants to buy this wait until you've verified from other people that it pairs well with your devices. a 500 USD headset SHOULD be able to connect well for that price and if it doesn't its most certainly flawed... note: that im using an earlier version of airpods so maybe this flaw is absent in later airpods? but i thought id share this negative experience
> AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
That's no bueno. Are we to assume this only works with apple devices?
E.G. when I open GarageBand, and hit a piano key - is there still a bloody whole second delay before I hear it in my ‘AirPods Pro’ with a ‘custom’ W1 chip on a device supposedly made for creatives?
No, really. For creators, this might be the worst value proposition I’ve ever seen. $550 USD for headphones that can’t operate without latency.
If it wasn’t for the wheels or the stand on the Mac Pro, I would say this is the worst value proposition I’ve seen, period.
I’ve seen mock-ups of an iPhone 13 without a headphone jack. Will they just stop offering GarageBand, or any other music creation apps?
I have no idea why people are downvoting you.
I think these headphones look awesome but BT latency is beyond ridiculous - i can currently game on a server in 4K 60hz that's a about 600 miles away with 16ms of latency via WIFI from button press to "already decoded 4k video on my screen" on an old laptop (Shadow-PC, stadia like service).
That you can't get low bitrate audio decoded in less than 300ms less than a metre away is absolutely absurd above taken into consideration.
I totally agree that the pro headphone market, for actual content production ie. music, timed editing etc. needs to have below - i would say 20 ms.
Personally i think it's the BT standard though as i have been looking far and wide for actual good "live performance" headphones.
If anyone knows why Bluetooth is so horridly bad i'm all ears, my previous post taken into consideration where i can literally stream 10MBps video with 16ms latency including decoding over a normal WiFi router.
>a ‘custom’ W1 chip on a device supposedly made for creatives?
According to Apple Bloggers creatives are a small market and really Apple is about serving the 99% not you and the Pro doesn't really mean for Professionals and all the other arguments that get wheeled out when this stuff starts to fall short.
That is a problem. That it is continually brought up to the point that you're bringing it up in advance in attempt to dismiss it means it's so much of a problem that it shouldn't be dismissed.
The branding is just wrong. No, it's not an 'iPad Pro', if I can't run 'Logic Pro', Apple's own 'Pro' software on it. It's not a 'MacBook Pro', if it has the same goddamn SOC as the MacBook Air. (You can order an Air with the identical 8-core processor as the Pro)
A consumer could easily make the mistake of buying an iPad Pro, reasonably thinking it could run Logic Pro, only to find out that it can't.
If latency is a concern, you can actually switch to using these via a wired (non-Bluetooth) connection as well. There's bound to be some minimal latency due to the DSP, but an order of magnitude lower than via Bluetooth.
All Bluetooth headphones have some delays. If you want no delay, then you should really be looking at other options. But maybe the Apple ones have a larger delay.
Edit: Looks like Availability differs greatly across the world. Also wish HN had strikethrough markdown. Keeping the comment below intact.
And while 460 Comments are shitting on its Pricing.
Shipping time is 12 Weeks for Green, 10 Weeks for Blue, and 8 Weeks for other colours. This is looking like the original AirPod launch where supply wont catch up to demand for quite some time. They are selling like hotcakes.
Yes, it is expensive, but it also has 9 Microphones, 9 Sensors and two H1 Chip. So it is more expensive than a B&W PX7, it certainly does offer a lot more functions.
Really quite curious to see how these stack up against the $263 Sennheiser HD1s, my current favorite over-ear noise cancelling bluetooth headphones, which sound lovely (my daily drivers are the HD820s, for reference).
I can't really speak to the price (like others in the thread) until I hear them. It's possible they're $1000 headphones for <$600, much like how insanely high-quality the HomePod is for its price. It's also possible they're just some Beats in a metal case. Impossible to tell without actually using them.
“AirPods Max come with a soft, slim Smart Case that puts AirPods Max in an ultralow power state that helps to preserve battery charge when not in use.”
Because apparently just “turning them off” is too normal I guess?
If this HN thread would not have been so popular I would have not bought this new Apple headphones. I already have got Airpods(in use), Airpods Pro(daily), Sennheiser M2(broken - not charging) and M3(daily in use). I am looking for comfort, good sound quality, nose canceling and easy to use.
If I don't like them I'll just return it.
The price is high but I am happy to pay for it - if I can make use of them 3+ hours per day while working on my computer - and Apple knows that!
When the mention of the magnets came up, I figured this was a bit more than I wanted to spend. What a bummer, but I hope it ends up being real audiophile grade hardware.
Not the biggest fan of the design nor the lack of options for colors. Also, no further technical specs makes absolutely hard to justify the hefty price point.
$549 is way too much to pay for a pair of AirPods Max when you can buy both Sony WH-1000XM4 ($278 on Amazon) and Apple AirPods Pro ($249) for less and still have money left over for a burger. I own a pair of WH-1000XM3s and have thought about the AirPods, since the Sonys are not that portable for all situations. Even if the AirPods Max are really good, I still don't see them being the Sony + AirPods Pro combination.
A good pair of analog headphones will last a decade or more if looked after. In fact, I've got a 20yr-old pair of Sennheiser HD580s that still sound decent (thanks to the availability of replacement cables and earpads)
Do people really want to spend this much on something with a non-user-replaceable battery and with no analog input, no way to avoid the limitations of Bluetooth?
Yeah, I get it, it's a fashion accessory not an audio product.
A bit on the expensive side for me, but still might consider it. Only thing I'm concerned about is the battery. My airpods are more or less dead now after 2 years and 8 months. They were not crazy expensive, but they worked fine up until the last few months. The Max is almost three times as expensive. If the battery stops working after 3 years I don't think it will be worth it for me.
Am I the only one who still doesn't see what the issue with an old fashioned 3.5mm pair of cabled headphones? I have a quality pair of headphones that works great, that I can easily plug into anything, except nowadays many phones. I still don't get what issue wireless is solving? All this talk of battery life and easily connecting is ridiculous. What's so horrible about a cable?
With a laptop and multiple monitors, the length of cord I need for wired headphones is longer than most 3.5mm headphones provide. When I bought a pair of overhead cabled headphones with a long cord I found the cord was in the way of my mouse and keyboard. It was workable but annoying. I would even run over the cable with my chair sometimes.
When running, climbing or just doing chores around the house, wireless headphones really make it easier to not get them yanked out of your head.
If your use cases don't run into any limitations with a 3.5mm cabled headphone then you certainly shouldn't pay the extra money to be able to freely move your head/body around. For me I am very happy to pay for that as it has improved my experience dramatically.
Exactly. I wear a single AirPod when going on runs, walks, and on my cycling trainer, and the difference is night and day; I don't know why it's so frustrating to have an earbud ripped out of your ear, but it is.
My AirPods are one of the few things that if I were to lose I'd buy again immediately.
While I do appreciate my AirPods, especially for noise cancelation/pass-through modes, the possibility of dropping them or having them fall out while running does weigh on me.
I still love wired headphones too, especially because I never have to think about charging. I run the wire under my hoodie so there’s no issues with it snagging.
I like wired headphones, but I've broken 2 expensive pairs due to the wire.
So, 6 of one, half a dozen of another.
I haven't pulled out my wired headphones in a long time, wireless is just so nice.
Just one example, wireless with noise cancelling means I can listen to a podcast while cooking with the exhaust fan on high, while fiddling with my phone to check up on the recipe, without worrying about the cord.
Nothing's wrong with a cable if you're content with it and have a solution that works for you. (There are lots of issues that cables cause for me, but they don't apply to you, as you're content! So it's not necessary to go into them.)
In arm's reach I have three different headphones: One is wired XLR, two is dual wireless and 3.5mm wired, three is wireless only. They have all been used in the past 24 hours.
Meet your needs however you see fit, and once you're happy, be happy! Others will choose differently. They shouldn't pressure you about it, and I certainly don't intend to either.
A cynical take Ive heard before: replacing a power cable with a lithium ion rechargeable battery turns many devices into a quasi subscription service (you pay for a product but then must "renew your subscription" when the battery goes out).
This is something I want standardized across headsets so multiple vendors can add support. Imagine spatially aware zoom calls, being able to turn towards or lean it to someone's voice.
I love high quality audio, but I'd pay $550 for a better video conferencing experience.
As an aside, I wonder what the latency is on these? Many BT headsets can have a 200+ms latency, which contributes to how horrible video calls are.
Am I the only one who is not a fan of their design? I get that there might be a slight reference to the legendary Koss SP-3 from 1958, but come on - they don't have to look THAT antique.
I think they look a bit too sterile for something that people "wear". Very corporate, not very soulful. Especially the big blank aluminum surface. The head band also looks rather plasticky.
The british stuff, eg from B&W, has more elegance. Combine with nordic minimalism and maybe some natural materials like leather and it would be more appealing. But I'm sure they are technically superior.
I'm surprised no one is pointing out similar these are to the surface headphones. Pairing to multiple devices, ambient mode with adjustable noise canceling, playing and pausing music when you take them off or on, etc. I like some of the design of Airpods Max (the crown seems strange) and the sound quality is probably better.
This is what I want these to do: let me seamlessly switch from my phone to my computer(tablet/watch) and back, or heck connect to all of them at the same time but let me easily control it.
Bluetooth has gotten pretty good recently but I still have to tap and click a lot to switch my Sony headphones from my phone to my computer and back.
I have an older pair of Sony MDr-100ABNs and they handle transitioning from music on my laptop to voice calls from my phone fairly seamlessly but only because I've disable the headset profile on my laptop AND I have to ensure I connect to my laptop first so my phone doesn't steal the media profile.
My partner has new WH-XB900Ns and they do not seem to suffer this issue but will only play output from one device at a time.
I would be willing to pay a premium for headphones that could maintain active connections between multiple devices simultaneously and mux the audio into a unified stream.
> AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
Wait, can these only be used on Apple devices? Or is there a Bluetooth fallback. I guess to spend so much you’d be a little crazy to just want a vanilla Bluetooth experience.
Do not buy their 1st gen product for at least 6 mos to 1 yr. Especially for these audio products which are not Apple's domain expertise
All the airpod pros (ear buds) during the 1st year of manufacturing suffers from a rattle issue that develop over a short period of time. Many people have warrantied 3-4 pairs of these.
I was very interested in upgrading my Sony WH-1000XM3s for a moment until I saw the price.
I love my both my AirPods and XM3, they're completely different headphones with completely different uses cases. They're both fantastic at what they do. There is no way these are $300 better than my XM3s however.
When Optimus ordered Maximus to "Sacrifice to save your life; if not I shall make you die in torment," Maximus answered, "I have always wished it; it is in order to pass out of this short and miserable life to the life eternal that I have declared my faith." [wikipedia]
It uses a lightning cable??! You’ve gotta be kidding me. So if you buy these and then buy the new iPhone rumored for next September your $550, less than a year old high-tech headphones will need to charge with a deprecated, proprietary cable that you’ll have to keep around just for them.
My understanding is current Airpods don't have the ability to do Activation Lock. Given The Max's pricing I wonder if it would be prudent to add some similar feature. Back when Beats were big they were allegedly a pretty common target of theft.
The folks who have noted that high price is seldom an obstacle and if anything, a feature for Apple insofar as it accessorises some kind of social signalling, are right on point.
As a road cyclist, there's a 100% parallel here to Specialized S-Works bike frames.
If this beats the MICROPHONE noise cancellation of the Bose QC3,then I’m in. My Bose are great at cancelling noise for my ears but super crappy for the other person when I’m on any kind of call (you can hear every little sounds from outside).
Lol this costs more than a Xbox Series X or PS5 for comparison and with Xbox Game Pass you’re at same value as AirPods Max but with hours and hours of entertainment. This isn’t worth $550 probably $200-$300 around AirPods Pro price.
These look pretty nice, pricey, but nice. Given that they can be 'tuned' to your hearing (unlike the Bose equivalents AFAICT) it could be a good deal for people like me with hearing loss in specific frequencies.
Everyone is commenting on the price but what about the buttons on top of the ear cap?
Do you grab the entire cap and press? I don't get this design.
Am I the only one here how feels this needs to be answered?
Will be looking forward to trying these out, when available and safe to do so. IMO, Apple hit it out of the park with HomePod sound quality (for the size and price) and have high hopes for these..
Oh, so this is why they moved the MBP headphone jack to the right-side: to incentivize me to get wireless headphones, avoiding the transverse plane obstruction of so many right-handed mice.
Nice industrial design and I'm sure the integration and spatial audio will be great (like the Airpods Pro) but $900AUD seems about twice the price point I'd expect them to be at.
> AirPods Max come with a soft, slim Smart Case that puts AirPods Max in an ultralow power state that helps to preserve battery charge when not in use.
Having just bought a pair of DT 1770 pros, I will be really interested to see how these compare. Also, how they will interact with my DAC/HeadPhone amp.
The hilarious thing about this thread is that all the so-called audiophiles on here sneering at Apple's attempts at audio are the same people who will go out an happily waste their money on all the lovely snake-oil that is prevalent in the audio industry. Oxygen free gold-plated cables, special power cables etc. etc. ...
That's not what I'm seeing, are we in the same thread? It is putting these in that same sphere. Most point out that there are very, very competent competitors around half the price and are looking for what makes these different (the snake oil as you say).
This isn’t marketed at audiophiles though. This is marketed at middle management and execs who have been saving their restaurant money throughout COVID and want to conspicuously flout their success on Zoom calls.
These are not designed for music. They’re designed for Zoom.
Or there are commenters like you that would happily throw ANY ammount of money just to get their hands on a new piece of gear with apple logo no matter how shitty it is...
$500 for headphones is fine, if they would last 20 years.
AirPods look like flimsy plastic stuff. For portable heapdhones they are not water resistant, do not fold and not even come with hard case.
And given apple, there will be no spare parts and manuals.
Right - I gifted a pair of MDR7506s to my girlfriend the other day.
I love that they include an insert telling you exactly how to take the entire headphone apart - I don't think I've owned a pair like that before.
But, I broke out my B&O H6s to do an A/B test after giving them to her, and I think it was a mistake? The H6s are of course in the next higher price price bracket, but the 7506s did not compare musically to them at all.
As much as I appreciate the repairability of the 7506s, I think would recommend something a bit more musical as a daily driver.
The Sony is basically flat (by mass-market standards), with a little emphasis in the "presence" area, 3-4.5KHz.
The B&O adds a bass boost from 20-50Hz, and then an upward curve from 400Hz up to 3.5KHz, then a bigger bump from 6.5KHz and up.
From that, I expect you found the B&O to bring a deeper thumping bass and a sparklier sound to cymbals. It's almost certainly more exciting than the Sony.
lmao it's $792 in Hungary, EU. Yes we have the highest VAT in Europe but still. Not that I have a comment on HN salary like most people here so yeah, that's fucking expensive.
tl;dr – you have multiple mics which allow you to improve sound quality (via a stronger signal from where you want it) + filter out frequencies that you don't want (i.e. background noise), without needing to do audio processing at a software level (though I'm sure Apple does that too).
You know how I easily switch my audio across devices? I unplug and plug in. That simple. I am still using my panasonic headphones from 12 years ago. I got them for $120.
Do AirPods Max support NFC for turning on and pairing? Sony supports it already since MDR-1000X (first-gen 1000-series), and it's the best thing since sliced bread.
Aaron Sorkin needs to make a sequel to Steve Jobs immediately, where Tim Cook leaves him in the dust and changes the world with truly groundbreaking innovation.
After less than 24 hours from launch, delivery time for any AirPods Max is currently 12-14 weeks. Say all you want, this has been a really successful product launch.
Including the Digital Crown from the Apple Watch demonstrates the power of Apple designing their hardware in house and amortizing new components over many products.
It’s not that it’s innovative in its function. It’s innovative in the speed of design and ability to leverage parts in their supply chain they already have.
They've already sold so much that you won't get them on the 15th any more, at least in Germany.
They're much pricier than I have anticipated. It doesn't look like I'm going to buy one any time soon. However, this "proves" nothing more than what we already knew: Apple sells expensive products that one can expect to work (close to) flawlessly for a long period of time, and a lot of people like that.
This. There doesn't seem to be any mention of a lossless codec over Bluetooth 5.0. Why spend so much effort on sound quality on the device if the source is lossy?
People still don't get this thing. Its simple : Big Corporations are taking big profit by using China as manufacturing, China is not a democracy, China is not free market economy, buying products completely made abroad is killing off a middle class and financing oppressive regime of CCP. Big companies have enough cash to relocate manufacturing in democratic countries.
As a consumer, you can search for products that are made locally or with minimum Chinese parts.
I guess it might surprise you to learn that China is a big place capable of manufacturing both high quality and cheaper, low quality products,
There’s a really interesting Netflix documentary American Factory that depicts one particular example, and puts on display a lot of the complicated factors you’re talking about. But the interesting thing is after like 2 years of training and tweaking processes, the American location of this auto glass factory just can’t for the life of them produce a product as high quality as the Chinese factory.
See also: most other Apple products, for more examples of high quality things manufactured in China.
Also, call me crazy but why should I care about random Midwestern Americans any more than random Chinese people I’ve never met? Globalization has raised an astounding number of people in China out of poverty in the past 20 years which is an amazing feat.
Not wanting to support the country because of the governments human rights abuses is totally fair, but you seem to be mixing that in as just one reason among all the other protectionist rhetoric.
Lastly, to pretend that companies are giant infinite pools of money that are choosing to hold out on everyone is just silly. If they were to manufacture things in more expensive places, then you’d be looking at $700 headphones instead of $550. If you’d rather support other companies, then great, do that! That’s the beauty of having so many choices.
Yep you are right, I have a consumer choice. I just linked to high end audio product manufactured in Germany, where you cant use slaves to build for you on a thin cost margin and then sell on high profit.
If you think this list of high-end headphones, many of them even open-backed, are good alternatives to wireless, noise canceling headphones, then I can't really relate.
One is for sitting alone in a quiet room listening to music, the other is for travel, work, commuting, etc. in noisy environments where you still want decent sound quality.
The only real alternatives to these new Airpods are things like the Bose QC3 and similar Sony model, and based on the pricing I would say Apple is confident theirs sound significantly better.
https://uk.pcmag.com/headphones/3341/the-best-noise-cancelli...
Lots of alternatives and with not so heavy price tag.
But reading comments here I regret posting my reaction.
Obviously the new age Apple users deserve everything that they get. I am happy that this company has nothing to do with me, and my office macs are not T2 and will run Linux for years to come.
Enjoy your overpriced vertically integrated shiny nonsense and don't forget to buy collectable ear cushions, only 70 bucks.
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ0E3ZM/A/airpods-max-ear...
Practically, not choosing China at this moment is impractical, to say the least. But I would applaud sites doing teardowns if they started cataloging the provenance of the major components used in each product. This would be a first step to allow consumers make more informed purchases in the future.
After my experience with the gen 1 pods that I bought for exclusively for SITTING ON HOLD that never worked right (crackly, pairing sucks, won't wake up, etc.), no way in hell will I give apple any of my money.
Pass. I do not need bigger, heavier Airpods nor a subpar audiophile-on-the-go experience.
I live in a home in the suburbs. I do not wear audiophile headphones in public.
I bought a Schitt Bifrost/Valhalla and Grado PS1000e combo 8 years ago. I use them every day with my Macbook Pro. Except for that year that High Sierra broke all USB audio stuff, it has been great with my Mac.
I use Airpods and Airpods Pro for Apple bluetooth benefits. They are great.
I scrolled all the way to find out the one thing im interested in with apple. How much do they take you for this time around. 549 or about 100 times what the Action store charges for headphones (with good sound). Sound is produced using magnets and a coiled up wire. Its the simplest electronic product out there by a large margin. Yet people are jumping at the chance to give apple money. I can only complement Apples marketing. They have done a phenomenal job.
Usability, care for minor conveniences, thorough support in the rest of Apple products: $529.
Some other companies tried to emulate this, with limited success. It's not just a problem of designing and executing (which are real large problems), but also a problem of forming a large base of devoted fans, and a reality-distorting field™ to keep them devoted.
The latter cannot be done with smoke and mirrors, only with solid design and engineering, plus the right elitist-but-accessible marketing. This is easier when you are Ferrari or Tissot, but Apple managed to be almost price-competitive, and sell massive amounts.
Very much true. You cant see these out of context of the whole ecosystem. Making the best (according to many) computers, operating systems and phones means being able to sell headphones at a high margin.
Every comment I have seen is flabbergasted by the price but I think there is a lot more interesting about these headphones. For example, they're clearly being marketed as "premium" over-the-ear headphones but they get the Airpods branding and not Beats? What does that mean for Beats? A 20 hour battery life beats my Bose 700s so it will be interesting to see if that holds up. Perhaps more jarring is the high price tag for what amounts to a cloth cover for a case but I suppose they are making the claim that you don't need to power it off?
I have an undisclosed short checklist of items I secretly check for when interviewing a candidate. I cannot use this list "officially" as most of the entries are either illegal or at least unethical.
One of these items specifically involves finding out whether the candidate uses anything Apple/Beats for music listening. Don't ask me why, it's a telltale sign on who I am hiring.
When Apple decides to make its "airpods" even bigger and more visible from further away, I can only feel happier.
p.s. Because there is so much dissonance in this thread, I will intentionally not mention whether I actually keep these candidates or let them go ;)
Sounds like you pass on them. And if you're serious, it sounds like you're a terrible and biased hiring manager either way. You should stop doing this.
Especially since you acknowledge that it would be illegal or at least unethical if you acknowledged it. Knock it off.
What a step back. There are no technical benefits to over-ear compared to in-ear and yet they charge more. This makes me lose hope that the Airpods line would improve over time.
The Airpods Pro (I still cringe at the stupidity built into the name) at least had strong technical merits. The only step they missed on was keeping them open back. You lose the ability to have cavity resonance for low frequency frequency response. The phase issues associated with this are imperceptible at low frequencies.
If they coupled that with tuning filters with microphones (flatten response and linearize phase up to an acceptable amount of delay: ~10 ms) then they would have a great product on their hands. Instead they made a piece of jewelry.
There's something about the colors that made me fell ill to my stomach. The rose color, it's just too much Apple. And I like my rose colored iPhone. What next, Apple t-shirts? How much and how large Apple branding are we expected to flout?
At least the iPods are rather small and the phone fits in the pocket.
I have a similar feeling about some of the other design features such as the carrying case and the watch style "winder". They seem overly fussy and lack cleanness IMHO.
I simply conclude these are not designed for me. I think I prefer my current QC35s
I do note though that they are not really branded as such. It's just that Apple's styling is very distinctive. My Bose headphones for instance feature an embossed Bose logo on each ear.
Remember the days when Apple was breaking new ground, pushing the limits? The iPod was fundamentally a game changer in the music space. The iPhone caught Blackberry with their pants down and they never recovered. Macbooks were a level up in so many ways to their competitors.
It was worth paying extra for the device Apple was selling because everyone else was years behind them.
Now it's wireless headphones with technologies that have all been done before, for more than $500. Or the same iPhone as last year, with a slightly better processor. Why pay more for that? I mean, sure, they seem high quality enough- but $549 level high quality?
Come on Apple, surprise me. Make me feel like the iPod announcement again.
What's exciting about the M1 Macs? Personally, I've never been excited about anything from Apple. Everything always seems to be about locking you into their stuff. If it excites you, good for you. It is not for me and it is not for a lot of people.
A significant change in PC processor architecture, with seamless translation of legacy apps and huge gains in both performance and battery life seems pretty cool.
Airpods are a pretty big deal. The Apple Watch and iPad continue to be basically uncontested in their markets as well.
It's difficult to have an iPod or iPhone moment these days. Some of those products I mentioned sell more than the iPod did in its day, they just seem small in the face of Apple's $2T business, and the much larger selection of products in the consumer electronics space.
I guess my point is that it's not binary. Apple can do exciting things and also release overpriced niche headphones. The latter doesn't mean nothing they do can be interesting or have a big market impact.
And (at least in my recollection), Apple's devices - like the ipod mini / nano - weren't THAT expensive, compared to the rest of the market and what they offered in terms of storage space and the like.
The new generation of Macs are also err... reasonably priced for the performance? I think? I mean if they really do beat high end Macbook Pros on the same (real life) workload, they're offering a ton of value for money.
For... the very little that it’s worth, these must have been in development for a long time given that I remember reading a patent 4 years ago from Apple that was for over-ear transparency mode.
As much as it’s an evolution of the AirPods Pro and doesn’t do anything completely new, you can’t say that innovation wasn’t driven here.
I thought these looked familiar, but it was just the metal frame reminding me of jabra elite/ evolve.
Usually when apple creates a new product they are very careful to give it a distinct look that is immediately identifiable from competitor products.
---
Entirely off-topic: Looking forward to seeing people who make 1/3 of what I make (and my salary is pretty average) telling me they are a winner because they snagged one of these babies on release day. We are so easily fooled...
The implication there is that if someone made twice as much as you did and made a similar brag, that they wouldn't be foolish. You may not think these are a good value purchase. I don't either. But flaunting your income as a sign of being a winner is an ironically similar fallacy.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25344762&p=2
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25344762&p=3
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25344762&p=4
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25344762&p=5
(yes, these comments are a workaround which will eventually self-destruct)