or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Why the Beats Hate?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why the Beats Hate? - Page 30

post #436 of 1488

For anyone out there who knows what I posted, I sincerely apologise if it had caused any offence. It was silly of me to think it would be alright to do such a thing, and it won't happen again. I'll stick to quarrelsome argument without it.

 

For those who don't know what I posted, I cannot mention the nature of it here.

post #437 of 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by vantt1 View Post
 

For anyone out there who knows what I posted, I sincerely apologise if it had caused any offence. It was silly of me to think it would be alright to do such a thing, and it won't happen again. I'll stick to quarrelsome argument without it.

 

For those who don't know what I posted, I cannot mention the nature of it here.

Quote:
  Simply saying that "because they suck" would be immature.

Are you talking about this, perhaps? If so, then I don't see why it would be that offensive...it's kinda true, honestly. We all must face the bitter, brutal truth.

post #438 of 1488

No, it wasn't that. The post was deleted by an admin.

post #439 of 1488

Beats are just not good headphones when you can get better for $20(Monoprice 8323s hmm). And when people say they want bass, they can get much better sounding bass for way cheaper. The bass in any beats are very muddy. You're paying for the name pretty much.

post #440 of 1488

Believe it or not, Beats improved a lot with the new studios. I was a bit impressed with their improvement.

post #441 of 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimvictor View Post
 

Believe it or not, Beats improved a lot with the new studios. I was a bit impressed with their improvement.

 

I haven't heard the new beats but I do believe you. I still think they are overpriced and you can get really good bass centric headphones for less money. I had a pair of the old solo hd and it was a bit muddy, with the treble boost eq on the iPhone they sounded better and the build quality was good but they are not worth the $199 

post #442 of 1488
Well, being 'worth' $199 would be subjective. It depends whether you value sound quality or fashionability more.
post #443 of 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkAwesome View Post

Beats differs from Rolex because:
-A $1000 Rolex probably is more accurate than my $30 Casio. Diminishing returns tend not to be bashed on Head fi (e.g. STAX), negative returns are different. 
-The vast, vast majority of people buy Rolexs as fashion accessories. There are very few people that are duped into thinking they provide head over heels improvements in timekeeping accuracy compared to much cheaper watches. 

I really don't mind people buying Beats for fashion. I don't think most of us care about those people. We generally take issue with the fact that people are buying Beats for sound quality. 

Also, we are headphone enthusiasts, not watch enthusiasts. 

I can tell haha. You're $30 Casio is much more accurate than any Rolex! And fashion is for fossil! Not Rolex. My point is, there is an extreme correlation between high end audio and fine time pieces. Engineering, passion and craftsmanship!

Beats are for fashion.. They don't fit the Rolex, Audemars, IWC etc model.

sorry guys, had to clear that up! Lol
post #444 of 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by WitHuntybee View Post

Beats are just not good headphones when you can get better for $20(Monoprice 8323s hmm). And when people say they want bass, they can get much better sounding bass for way cheaper. The bass in any beats are very muddy. You're paying for the name pretty much.

Would you be able to name a few of the bass heavy headphones you speak of.

I am looking for some for the gym and am currently interested in the Sony xb400 but want to find out if they can be taken apart or not. However I would be interested in any cheap bass heavy headphones if you could name some. Thanks
Edited by sikwidit - 12/12/13 at 3:08pm
post #445 of 1488

1. hype

2. gimmick

post #446 of 1488
I too fell for the "beats are garbage" train until I tried the new studios. I don't care for the executives or pros or any other beats. I do think the mixr aren't bad, but not my cup of tea.

The studios are pretty great, imo and I'm not afraid to say it. They aren't perfect by any means, but they do a lot well. Comfort (for me an underrated portion of quality headphones). They feel great. Light weight and not nearly as fragile as before. Bass is tuned way down compared to previous models and its right where I like bass. Treble is very good and mids too. Its only weakness for me is the ANC. I will say though, the white noise that is noticeable isn't as noticeable when music is on. I really do like their sound and would be a happy owner if I had them. I think, though they would be suited better in the $200 market and not $300. I would buy a pair for $200 in a heartbeat.
post #447 of 1488

Beats... Heh... See too many of those things. When I first heard the Studios and Solos, they just were absolutely terrible. I loved the way the XB500s sounded over the Beats, so I got the 500s instead.

post #448 of 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by j14mp View Post


I can tell haha. You're $30 Casio is much more accurate than any Rolex! And fashion is for fossil! Not Rolex. My point is, there is an extreme correlation between high end audio and fine time pieces. Engineering, passion and craftsmanship!

Beats are for fashion.. They don't fit the Rolex, Audemars, IWC etc model.

sorry guys, had to clear that up! Lol

 

You have no idea how inaccurate watches with automatic movements are. They have to be like accurate within 5 minutes a day to be called a chronograph or something. A $30 Casio's quartz movement will beat a Rolex any time of  the day (except for when there is a strong EMP).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sikwidit View Post


Would you be able to name a few of the bass heavy headphones you speak of.

I am looking for some for the gym and am currently interested in the Sony xb400 but want to find out if they can be taken apart or not. However I would be interested in any cheap bass heavy headphones if you could name some. Thanks

 

Care to share why you want to take it apart? Any headphone can be taken apart. It depends on whether you have the skill to.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minarets View Post

I too fell for the "beats are garbage" train until I tried the new studios. I don't care for the executives or pros or any other beats. I do think the mixr aren't bad, but not my cup of tea.

The studios are pretty great, imo and I'm not afraid to say it. They aren't perfect by any means, but they do a lot well. Comfort (for me an underrated portion of quality headphones). They feel great. Light weight and not nearly as fragile as before. Bass is tuned way down compared to previous models and its right where I like bass. Treble is very good and mids too. Its only weakness for me is the ANC. I will say though, the white noise that is noticeable isn't as noticeable when music is on. I really do like their sound and would be a happy owner if I had them. I think, though they would be suited better in the $200 market and not $300. I would buy a pair for $200 in a heartbeat.

 

The old Studios now sell for $199 here in Australia. They used to be $499 about 2 years ago, and then dropped to $399 before the new ones came out. $199 is a good price, considering the Australian market.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MineTwine45 View Post
 

Beats... Heh... See too many of those things. When I first heard the Studios and Solos, they just were absolutely terrible. I loved the way the XB500s sounded over the Beats, so I got the 500s instead.

 

Strange, I found the XB500s to have heavier bass than the Studios. Not the Solos, though. I'd say the XB500s have tighter but heavier bass, whereas the Beats are just muddy.

post #449 of 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by vantt1 View Post

 

Strange, I found the XB500s to have heavier bass than the Studios. Not the Solos, though. I'd say the XB500s have tighter but heavier bass, whereas the Beats are just muddy.

 

The 500s did have more bass, but I thought the sound quality was much clearer and less muddy, as you stated.

post #450 of 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by vantt1 View Post
 

 

 

 

 

Care to share why you want to take it apart? Any headphone can be taken apart. It depends on whether you have the skill to.

 

 

Certainly, I plan to take them apart and modify them so that they will have a detachable cord coming out of one side, assuming there is enough room inside to do so of course. These will be primarily for gym use so that will make them more convenient. Also just in case one side stops working for some reason I can easily replace the cables. The only reason I want to make sure they are even able to be opened is because from the pics I have seen and what I have read about them, the actual earpads dont seem to be able to come off, rather they seem to be fixed to the headphone in some way(glue, stitching, etc). This makes me assume they are opened from the back or somehow at the seam of the plastic coming together, I have just not seen anything about anyone owning these headphones and opening them. Thats why I was just wondering if anyone who has the Sony xb400s has ever taken them apart and gotten to the speaker pcb.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Why the Beats Hate?