Head-Fi.org › Forums › Head-Fi Network & Industry News › Head-Fi mentioned in New York Times article about headphones!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Head-Fi mentioned in New York Times article about headphones! - Page 3

post #31 of 149

Congratulations!

Although the article, in many people's minds here on head-fi would be:

"why attract noobs?"

 

Then again in my mind it says:

"we can teach them a few things"

 

Other than another beats thread - I would say keeping this, what it is - a head-fi indirect advert in a HUGE newspaper, which ironically the owner, Jude, reads.

Must put a smile on ones face methinks :)

 

Like seeing myself on BBC -> I've done that already, via  a dance video :P

post #32 of 149

I never really thought about it much, but Head-Fi is actually a really big and influential site. Headphones are becoming more and more popular, and more and more people seem willing to spend the extra dollar to get nice stuff. And everywhere you go online, if somebody asks about headphones, somebody else will post a link to these very forums.  

  

This is great. Hopefully it means more ad hits, and more budget for youtube videos of Jude talking about headphones, haha. I showed all my friends the SR-009 review and for some reason everybody, even the people with no interest in headphones, were just enthralled, and totally sold on the idea that headphones were amazing.

post #33 of 149

Funny how being a New York newspaper it does not mention Grado headphones, a New York brand, and one of the best known in the HI-FI world.

But it's still great if the word gets out about good sounding music and all.

post #34 of 149

Whether you agree with their column writers or not, the NYT tries not to publish the profoundly uninformed. 

 

That's what shocked me the most, because this is what I had thought would be true of NYT. This is why I was really excited before reading this because I figured it would be professionally written and professionally researched.

post #35 of 149

congrats Jude!  

 

i also read the nyt daily and have since a freshman in college in massachusetts, where i had a string outside my 2nd story window that the newsboy tied around my paper every morning, since the dorm was locked.  i'd open my window, pull up my nyt (and globe) and read sitting in the window/sunshine, listening to my stax SR-3/SRD-5 before heading out to the cafeteria for breakfast.

post #36 of 149

"But for some audiophiles, one set of headphones isn’t enough. Ronald Shmyr, a U.S.-based banker and a self-professed audiophile, owns several different pairs, each for a different purpose: Sony in-ear buds for music, Shure in-ear buds for athletics, over-ear padded Sennheiser headphones for comfort, and the full-size Bose for noise canceling. The newest addition to his collection is his favorite — the Bluetooth wireless Beats by Dr. Dre"

 

 

 

 

why

post #37 of 149
All publicity is good, except an obituary notice.
~Brendan Behan
post #38 of 149

They should have interviewed Jude too.

post #39 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by 563 View Post

Not to be a spoil sport or polemic about this, but I'm curious why generating more interest among folks in head-fi or headphones is necessarily (or supposed to be) a good thing?  I'm trying to figure this one out - is the thought that if more new people are interested in headphones, the more incentive there'll be for manufacturers to develop new products?  To answer my own question, I doubt that the result of greater interest in our hobby will necessarily (or likely) result in greater improvements in the kinds of headphones and equipment we typically would want or have already.  Similarly, why is it necessarily "good" that more people get educated about headphones?  Even if that happens as a result of this article or other publicity, either we end up with more undesirable mass market cans and equipment, along the lines of Beats or whatever, or headphone manufacturers will simply find yet another reason to raise their prices even higher than their overly high prices now (yeah, I'm one of those who thinks 195 dollars or more for a 2 inch LOD cable is waaay too much, for example, as nice as it may look, even taking into consideration that the manufacturers have to make a profit - to my mind, overpriced is overpriced, as I see it.)   And why is it assumed that attracting more users to head-fi will result in a better website rather than simply cluttering head-fi up with unnecessary posts?  Attracting more head-fi users may increase sales for sponsors here, but how will it improve our user experience?  

 

This is a long way of saying that more doesn't necessarily mean better.



I disagree with every single one of your points.

 

> is the thought that if more new people are interested in headphones, the more incentive there'll be for manufacturers to develop new products? Definitely yes. If less and less people became intersted then the whole industry would demise.

 

> why is it necessarily "good" that more people get educated about headphones? Why not? I was certainly "educated" since I came to head-fi. As were others, who previously thought that all headphones in the world are made by Sony, Beats, Sennheiser and Bose.

 

> And why is it assumed that attracting more users to head-fi will result in a better website? I think the two particular features of head-fi that I like are head-fi tv and the for sale forum and its feedback system. And I assume that without attracting more users to head-fi, Jude wouldn't have bothered to implement such features.

 

post #40 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick01 View Post



I disagree with every single one of your points.

 

> is the thought that if more new people are interested in headphones, the more incentive there'll be for manufacturers to develop new products? Definitely yes. If less and less people became intersted then the whole industry would demise.

 

> why is it necessarily "good" that more people get educated about headphones? Why not? I was certainly "educated" since I came to head-fi. As were others, who previously thought that all headphones in the world are made by Sony, Beats, Sennheiser and Bose.

 

> And why is it assumed that attracting more users to head-fi will result in a better website? I think the two particular features of head-fi that I like are head-fi tv and the for sale forum and its feedback system. And I assume that without attracting more users to head-fi, Jude wouldn't have bothered to implement such features.

 


x2

 

post #41 of 149

Congrats Jude!

 

http://www.head-fi.org/

 

and 

 

http://www.headphone.com/

 

Like most here I like the promotion of headphones to the unwashed masses. Plus the links and mention of a place were new to the hobby can come to learn about headphones. All that can offset the some what miss leading info about headphone the author of the article showed. I think it's enough laughing and finger pointing so once more Congrats Jude, Head-Fi and Head room

 

post #42 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick01 View Post



I disagree with every single one of your points.

 

> is the thought that if more new people are interested in headphones, the more incentive there'll be for manufacturers to develop new products? Definitely yes. If less and less people became intersted then the whole industry would demise.

 

> why is it necessarily "good" that more people get educated about headphones? Why not? I was certainly "educated" since I came to head-fi. As were others, who previously thought that all headphones in the world are made by Sony, Beats, Sennheiser and Bose.

 

> And why is it assumed that attracting more users to head-fi will result in a better website? I think the two particular features of head-fi that I like are head-fi tv and the for sale forum and its feedback system. And I assume that without attracting more users to head-fi, Jude wouldn't have bothered to implement such features.

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak47-whaaa View Post


x2

 


x3 :P

 

Although I'm still learning :D!

 

 

post #43 of 149

I do really like the for sale forums, and am a regular and avid fan of head-fi.  That said, I still question whether more is better, and I also don't think "any publicity is good," but then again, maybe I'm just being a curmudgeon.  

post #44 of 149

Excellent. A monument in head phone history. But what would be a true monument is if there was an article about amps since the general public tend to think amps are the same and commonly, they may not even know amps even exist.

post #45 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spareribs View Post

Excellent. A monument in head phone history. But what would be a true monument is if there was an article about amps since the general public tend to think amps are the same and commonly, they may not even know amps even exist.

They won't know amps exist or are important until Dr.Dre or Ludacris or 50 Cent says they are, makes a flashy one that doesn't even stack up to the E7/E11 and sells it for 400 dollars.


And then the New York Times will write an article about all these raving audiophiles and their love for their creme de la creme Amps By Dre®.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Head-Fi Network & Industry News
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Head-Fi Network & Industry News › Head-Fi mentioned in New York Times article about headphones!