
Edited by GigaFi - 5/11/12 at 5:15am
Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!

Thanks for taking on-
Err, thanks for the review!
I always thought that the MBP wasn't as bad as people made it out to be. And yes, a lot of people weren't aware of the KILLER deals you can get for the MBP.
I wonder how uncomfortable they really are, though. I find HE-500s very comfortable, which are really heavy (I guess not much clamp though).
As much as I think that most people would enjoy (though maybe never admit it) the styling of Beats, I personally would never get caught in public wearing one. I'd feel like such a tool..
lol 100 dollars is a steal since they aren't that bad sounding. i wouldn't pay over 150 for them though
I swear I'm the only person in the world who thinks Beats look terrible.
I much prefer the look of phones like the SRH840's and M50's. 
That makes us two. I shudder when I see that big fat b!
Personally, I really like the Pro. It is definitely superior to the M50, SRH840, HFI-580, all those "entry level" audiophile headphones. But the fact that you can get a D2000 for cheaper, when the difference in sound quality is so large, is pretty much a dealbreaker considering that they have very similar sound signatures.
Then again, $200 for them Pros are definitely within "audiophile price-to-performance ratio". $400? Beats can go suck my (headphone) jack.

Personally, I really like the Pro. It is definitely superior to the M50, SRH840, HFI-580, all those "entry level" audiophile headphones. But the fact that you can get a D2000 for cheaper, when the difference in sound quality is so large, is pretty much a dealbreaker considering that they have very similar sound signatures.
Then again, $200 for them Pros are definitely within "audiophile price-to-performance ratio". $400? Beats can go suck my (headphone) jack.
+1
Good review, a lot of snobs on headfi imo , the beats are too expensive no doubt but they are not that bad.
I had the solo HD and thought they were a fun listen but too pricey, sold them and bought zx700 (ZX700 is bargain imo).
Dont think the PRo was better than SRH840 though , thats a stretch.
I dont get the whole "good sounding but overpriced" thing.... if the HD800 sounded like 300 bucks phones would they be "good but overpriced" phones?.
What is there not to get? You are paying extra money that doesn't reflect the performance of the product but the "prestige" associated with the brand or product itself. A similar example of a product with a poor price/performance ratio would be the Macbook Pro IMO.
Don't get me wrong though, I'm not bashing the Beats as I haven't heard them. I quite like the look and if they were cheaper I wouldn't mind trying the Pro and Studio. As for the Solo, I have heard that and it is an overpriced, steaming pile of turd.
just that to me a product that cost X and performs like a X/3 product, is not a "good" product. (that is of course, if we measure the performance of headphones based on the sound, looks and design certainly can have a value).
Yea, it just makes you look like a tool :P
Interesting to see a non-trolling review; honestly when I tried these out I expected them to be a lot like the Bose AE; good sounding but expensive and/or uncomfortable. Unfortunately, they didn't hit that bar for me - I found them compressed/harsh and extremely uncomfortable; they just don't sound "good" (but consider the cans in my profile; I like bright cans with huge headstages). I agree that the bass is nowhere near as bloated and muddy as many of the hate threads argue. Honestly I look at it as a preference thing; the BP aren't "awful" if you like the sound. I dislike the general genre of headphones that the BP occupy, so I'm probably not the best judge of where they fit in with their peers (like the D2000, Sony XB, Pro900, etc (most of my complaints about the BP are similar to my complaints about other headphones like this)). Oh and they don't fit me very well!
Regarding the weight/comfort thing - my Kenwoods are 390g, that's 12g less than the Beats Pro. However the Kenwoods are among the most comfortable headphones ever (I'd put them on par with either of my Sony cans, which combined are maybe 400g). The difference with the BP is that the Kenwoods are bigger, have a bigger headband, have bigger earpads, bigger ear cups, and so on - this contributes a lot. The pads on both are soft and plush, which helps, but the extra girth does help.

Good review. Not sure about the "people who don't like them probably never tried them". I live in a country where in the capital there are 3 places to try AKGs. I only know 1 place to try the K702/701, and believe I've looked. Despite all this, I have no problem finding the entire Beats line-up. The bandwagon effect might be true, so maybe it's more accurate to say "most Beats bashers have their objective discernment clouded by the norm here at Head-Fi, which is to bash".
The reason why I quoted is because I don't truly agree with this logic. The fact that the 'average consumer' usually can't take 5 minutes to research anything doesn't excuse the Beats terrible price-quality ratio. An over-priced or bad headphone is nothing but that. It doesn't matter in the slightest how marketed or easily accessible it is, because that will never make it any better. Qualities are an objective thing, it either reproduces sound well (or in case of 'fun' signatures, what the majority thinks is well) or it doesn't. And when compared to other models, the price is either fair or it isn't. Saying "these are over-priced, but because consumers are stupid these are good" just isn't right, because marketing can't change a driver.