maybe, but he said beats are better than his HD800 + amp! OoO" so it has to be clear because beats tries so hard to cover it up with so much bass he thinks its better.(he partially rates headphone by bass QUANTITY) i have tried the 128 vs 320, it is a no brainer even my cheap HD202 could tell let alone my HD558 and his HD800 + amp (sorry i cannot name the amp, he doesnt even know what amp he has, all i know its a bout $1000-1500 from what he said
-_-" ) also he is used to the solo sound, he was about to get ANOTHER pair when his one showed amplitude imbalance, then suddenly a spark of wisdom caused him to ask me for advice, see his dad offered him a HD800 or a Solo. and i told him firmly to get the HD800, so thats why he has a HD800
also the thing is, HD800 is a super detailed headphone and will reveal any flaws in the track, making it actually sound worse than the beats, but thats just speculation since i haven't had a chance to listen to HD800 (HD700 i have tested at the shop though)
edit: Beats partly covers it with mud and bass, but also because it cannot even play the flaws in the track it may sound better for tracks which are 90% compression flaws (number plucked from thin air)
Honestly, I can see someone preferring a far, far cheaper pair of headphones over the HD800s. They definitely aren't for everyone. Not for me at any rate, I'm actually not a huge fan.