[rcoranje]

They're not scratch resistant. They WILL become a problem over time

I doubt it. We'll see.

 

[tinyman392]

I don't understand why people should be bothered by the clacking sound because the clacking can't do any harm. The aluminium cups can stand much more than some clacking, which is a rather sympathetic sound to my ears.

If you rub/hit two things with equal hardness together, overtime that mark will eventually begin to form as they will scratch each other. This is actually how you test wether two things are the same hardness, if A scratches B and B scratches A, they are the same hardness. If A and B are the same material, they are the same hardness.

The good thing is that because the texture (optically) of Apple's aluminum oxide is sort of sandblasted, it will hide scratches, but if you scratch a single area enough, it will eventually begin to show it. It's not the sound people don't like, it's the fact that they will inevitably damage each other in the long run. Chemistry says it's not an if, but a when.

 

[yticolev]

Hard anodized aluminum finish. Yes, you can scratch it on purpose (aluminum is fairly soft relatively), but clanking them together will not alter the finish in your lifetime. A scandal amongst the Apple fans would arise noisily if so. It takes a lot to wear off such a finish and you could hit it with a hammer and dent it, but the finish would be fine - similar to many painted car dents with far more fragile paint. I have seen an aluminum bicycle shock wear the anodization off on one side from sliding across its bushing, but only after millions of repetitions and then I discovered that it had been misaligned.

 

[tinyman392]

Hard anodized aluminum finish. Yes, you can scratch it on purpose (aluminum is fairly soft relatively), but clanking them together will not alter the finish in your lifetime. A scandal amongst the Apple fans would arise noisily if so. It takes a lot to wear off such a finish and you could hit it with a hammer and dent it, but the finish would be fine - similar to many painted car dents with far more fragile paint. I have seen an aluminum bicycle shock wear the anodization off on one side from sliding across its bushing, but only after millions of repetitions and then I discovered that it had been misaligned.

You probably won’t wear off the color, but you can definitely scuff it, especially when what’s constantly hitting it has the same hardness (or higher). Anodized aluminum (aluminum oxide) has a very high hardness (typically in the 7-9 range), which is why it actually is resilient to scratches and scuffs in general. However, that’s only relative to the stuff around it that’s brushing up against it. Note that the anodized finish on Aluminum has an almost sand-blasted look to it; that on its own can mask scratches very well and make them very difficult to see. I’ll agree that it will take a long time for the color to physically degrade (as you’d need to get past the anodized layer), but that doesn’t mean that marks on the surface won’t be visible in the right light.

The extreme example I’d use to show this point is that a diamond won’t scratch or scuff... Unless it’s place up against another diamond. Since they are of equal hardness, they will scratch each other. If you constantly have two diamonds brushing each other at the same spot over and over again, the locations where they brush up will eventually begin to show scratches and scuff marks. The AirPods will be no different (substitute diamonds for aluminum oxide).

Edit: I should note that I really don’t care about the scuffs in the long run. They’re just cosmetic after all. The main reason why I’m using the covers right now is because they aesthetically match up very well with the black APM. The fabric texturing/weave size matches up very well with the APM’s pads and the soft black plastic/rubber matches in color to the headband. Now if only the Spigen logo wasn’t there

 

[yticolev]

The clacking is easily resolved (as well as any wear and tear fears) by using a glasses nose pad. Get a translucent one and it is almost invisible.

 

[rael67]

What a pity the New Apple TV 4K will not support Spatial Audio.

 

[tinyman392]

What a pity the New Apple TV 4K will not support Spatial Audio.

I was very disappointed when I saw that. Apparently the new iMac will get Spatial Audio though. Really missed opportunity from Apple. I can still kind of understand challenges with getting it to work with the Apple TV though, even with the proper chips and hardware. Spatial Audio needs to know where the audio source is. For an iMac, iPad, and iPhone it's the device itself since the screen is attached to said device. However, if the screen is external, that's where the audio source would be; if the AppleTV isn't near the screen (IE off to the side or something), then the sound will be way off center.

I would think that in theory you could probably get Spatial Audio to work with linking the audio source to an AirTag or something, but that might be a bit cumbersome to setup (which Apple tends to shy away from).

 

[rael67]

I was very disappointed when I saw that. Apparently the new iMac will get Spatial Audio though. Really missed opportunity from Apple. I can still kind of understand challenges with getting it to work with the Apple TV though, even with the proper chips and hardware. Spatial Audio needs to know where the audio source is. For an iMac, iPad, and iPhone it's the device itself since the screen is attached to said device. However, if the screen is external, that's where the audio source would be; if the AppleTV isn't near the screen (IE off to the side or something), then the sound will be way off center.

I would think that in theory you could probably get Spatial Audio to work with linking the audio source to an AirTag or something, but that might be a bit cumbersome to setup (which Apple tends to shy away from).

What does exactly mean „linking the audio source to an AirTag“?

 

[tinyman392]

What does exactly mean „linking the audio source to an AirTag“?

This is something that theoretically be done, but won't be (with very high probability). Spatial Audio requires the headphones to know where the device playing the audio is located. With AppleTV that really isn't possible as the actual audio device would be your television; unless the Apple TV is where your TV is (either in front or behind), then the effect wouldn't work as the sound would sound like it's emanating from wherever the AppleTV is. If you could use an AirTag, put it on your TV, and somehow tell the headphones the AppleTV's audio source is at said AirTag, then in theory they could get Spatial Audio working with AppleTV by making the sound sound like it's emanating from the AirTag instead of the AppleTV which might be a couple feet from the TV (or however long the HDMI cable is).

Edit: keep in mind this is theoretically possible to do, it doesn't mean it will be done as it's kind of clunky to even think about setting something like that up (which Apple isn't a huge fan of).

 

[AnakChan]

I’ve not been following this thread (as such if any of the following is repetitive or indicative of unfamiliarity, do forgive me). I managed to listen to the AirPod Max for the 1st time yesterday as the local Apple store ditched the COVID registration queue, so customers can walk in more freely (but still have to QR register a govt endorsed app).

I have to say I was pleasantly surprised by the SQ. It was actually decent. To -my- ears, it was possibly mildly mid recessed but I hadn’t listened to enough tracks to be sure. I was puzzled by the modes though that there was only full ANC, or full transparency but no passive/natural isolation? Is that how the AirPod Max is supposed to behave or did I miss some setting?

Anyhow, the isolation worked pretty well with little “suction” that one normally hears with ANC. The NC didn’t cancel out everything but did a decent job. I dare say (based entirely from memory) that my shortlived Sony isolated a wee-bit more. However between the two, the AirPod Max didn’t sound as “digital” as my former Sony’s. The transparency mode worked very well IMO, better than Sony’s. The Apple’s transparency was (although not completely, but) more natural.

The AirPod Max is something I may be willing to consider, not just for music but for video/home theatre too.

P.S. But I do need to listen to it a little more to confirm if the mids were as recessed as I imagined. For that brief moment of listening, those mids were reminiscent of the Momentums...I could be wrong though.

 

[tinyman392]

I’ve not been following this thread (as such if any of the following is repetitive or indicative of unfamiliarity, do forgive me). I managed to listen to the AirPod Max for the 1st time yesterday as the local Apple store ditched the COVID registration queue, so customers can walk in more freely (but still have to QR register a govt endorsed app).

I have to say I was pleasantly surprised by the SQ. It was actually decent. To -my- ears, it was possibly mildly mid recessed but I hadn’t listened to enough tracks to be sure. I was puzzled by the modes though that there was only full ANC, or full transparency but no passive/natural isolation? Is that how the AirPod Max is supposed to behave or did I miss some setting?

Anyhow, the isolation worked pretty well with little “suction” that one normally hears with ANC. The NC didn’t cancel out everything but did a decent job. I dare say (based entirely from memory) that my shortlived Sony isolated a wee-bit more. However between the two, the AirPod Max didn’t sound as “digital” as my former Sony’s. The transparency mode worked very well IMO, better than Sony’s. The Apple’s transparency was (although not completely, but) more natural.

The AirPod Max is something I may be willing to consider, not just for music but for video/home theatre too.

P.S. But I do need to listen to it a little more to confirm if the mids were as recessed as I imagined. For that brief moment of listening, those mids were reminiscent of the Momentums...I could be wrong though.

You’re not imagining the mids, they are indeed recessed (upper mids) which is my major complaint about the sound signature as a whole. There are ways to try to help this with Apple’s Headphone Accommodations in their accessibility settings; note this setting applies to all AirPods though, not just the ones you’re setting up and it does not save to the headphone (only the device itself). So, it’s not a total solution to the issue as if you switch devices that option goes away.

Regarding full ANC, full transparency, and off. There is actually a way to turn both systems off, but it’s not enabled by default. If you’re on your phone you can go into the AirPods BT settings to allow the ANC button to cycle through all three settings. This setting should save to the headphone so if you connect to a non-Apple device it’ll still work. Additionally, if you go into control center and 3D touch/long press the volume bar with the AirPods connected, you’ll have the option to turn both systems off in there as well. There is no adjustment to the ANC or transparency while they are on though, no adjusting it so it’s lower or higher.

A lot of people like these for home theatre use, but a lot (rightfully so) want an Apple TV type setup that supports Spacial Audio. Right now the the biggest screen that supports it is the iPad, though the new iMac will also support it. Apple refreshed their Apple TV recently (not out yet, but announced) but didn’t give it the feature while the new iMac will receive it.

 

[AnakChan]

You’re not imagining the mids, they are indeed recessed (upper mids) which is my major complaint about the sound signature as a whole. There are ways to try to help this with Apple’s Headphone Accommodations in their accessibility settings; note this setting applies to all AirPods though, not just the ones you’re setting up and it does not save to the headphone (only the device itself). So, it’s not a total solution to the issue as if you switch devices that option goes away.

Regarding full ANC, full transparency, and off. There is actually a way to turn both systems off, but it’s not enabled by default. If you’re on your phone you can go into the AirPods BT settings to allow the ANC button to cycle through all three settings. This setting should save to the headphone so if you connect to a non-Apple device it’ll still work. Additionally, if you go into control center and 3D touch/long press the volume bar with the AirPods connected, you’ll have the option to turn both systems off in there as well. There is no adjustment to the ANC or transparency while they are on though, no adjusting it so it’s lower or higher.

A lot of people like these for home theatre use, but a lot (rightfully so) want an Apple TV type setup that supports Spacial Audio. Right now the the biggest screen that supports it is the iPad, though the new iMac will also support it. Apple refreshed their Apple TV recently (not out yet, but announced) but didn’t give it the feature while the new iMac will receive it.

Thx for the reply. The AirPod Max I tried was connected to the store's demo phone. I didn't consider trying to play with the settings from the phone. Good to know about the the ability to switch off ANC & transparency too.

That's a bummer to hear the confirmation of the mid recess. I guess there's some little consolation on the Headphone Accomodation settings. Next time I head to the store again I'll take a peek at those settings on the iPhone paired to the headphones.

 

[retskrad]

I have now used the AirPods Max och listened critically for 3 days and here are the takeaways:

+ It has the best sub-bass I've ever heard in any closed or open headphone. It's the best part of this headphone. I never understood what people meant they said a certain headphone has one-nore subbas and now I know. The driver is extremely fast in this region. It can produce notes of subbass I've never heard in a headphone before. Very nice!
+ It's ability to separate vocals from everything else in the recording is impressive.
+ The detail retrieval of this headphone puts it in the same league as $1000+ audiophile headphones
+ The soundstage and imaging is very, very good for a closed headphone

Now for for the cons...

- Vocals are rendered with sibilance and harshness that isn't supposed to be heard by the consumer. Praised headphones like the HD800 is harsh and grating on the ears but audiophiles claim it's "revealing". That's not true in my opinion. When professional sound engineers in the studio mix and master on studio speakers, they don't hear this sibilance and harshness in the final product. Sibilance and harshness is always the fault of the headphone.
- Vocals and the sound in general sounds slightly thinner than it should because the midbass and lower mids are slightly sightly lower than the rest of the FR.
- The upper mids/treble/upper treble section (I'm not sure exactly where it is) sounds noticebly more boosted than the mids and bass. The driver can't properly produce this part of the frequency response for some reason without sounding like someone applied a "treble booster" EQ. The treble has this unrefined quality to it that you hear in every recording. There is this sharp edge that is distracting. This is the biggest flaw of this headphone. Apple would've created something revolutionary if they could refine the uppermids/treble section and bring them to the same standard as the subbass and mids. I don't think it's impossible. The engineers at Apple are very close.

Now that I think about it, this headphone has the same cons and pros as the Sennheier HD58X and HD660S. For those who've heard these two headphones, just like the AirPods Max, they both have great bass and mids but the highs are just.. off. The treble/upper mids aren't refined enough. The treble in particular sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

[tinyman392]

@retskrad the sibilance in vocals did die down for me with time (lots of time though). I’m not sure how useful those words are since our impressions don’t perfectly line up, especially with the midrange.

 

[Bompah]

"Sibilance and harshness is always the fault of the headphone."

I would have to disagree with you here.

As an owner of several pieces of equipment which could be considered "bright" or "harsh", in the vast majority of cases the issue is not in the hardware. Most of the time the simple principle of "garbage in, garbage out" applies. The mastering and/or recording is nearly always the source. I can say this with a fair degree of confidence as someone who is very sensitive to sibilance, and who listens to a lot of metal; among the top genres for garbage recordings.

A great example (not from metal) is Adele's Royal Albert hall performance of "someone like you", on the consonant sounds it cuts like a knife, no matter which headphones, speakers, amps or DACs I've used. But if I listen to the studio recordings this is nowhere to be found.

Some equipment will emphasise sibilance, or recording flaws, but the equipment rarely adds it unless there is something wrong (e.g. in the DSP). I also recognise that some headphones and speakers can have an overly metallic timbre (Klipsh HP3) which will colour the music and can draw out harshness in recordings.

I don't find the APM to be particularly "sibilant", but can agree they can present a more artificial treble. I also don't think they are in the league of £1,000 headphones for detail or sound, £300-£500 wired headphones maybe, but that's about it (in my humble opinion). But I'm with you on the sub-bass all the way.

P.S. another great example just popped up as I was typing all of this, I am listening to Anathema's album "We're here because we're here" and there is no sibilance or harshness to be found in recording except in one track: "Presence", there is some spoken word on this track and because of how it has been recorded, and the speech pattern of the individual, there as some very sharp whistling sounds in his pronunciations which are notable and fairly sharp on all my headphones, but it is significantly sharper on the HD800S and only really distracting on my higher end equipment.