[LosMerengues]

Quote:

Nobody is completely immune to marketing.  Today's marketers are pretty good.
 
But still, anything endorsed directly by pretty much any "celebrity" always kind of makes me think twice about it.  I mean, before I even knew the first thing about the Beats, just seeing "Beats by Dr. Dre" completely turned me off.

 
Agreed, darn those marketers and their competence!
 
In all seriousness though, I agree, rarely does celebrity endorsement work on me  (unless of course they pick the perfect celebrity 

). I find the more subtle or elegant marketing campaigns have a far greater effect on me.
 
Just thought I'd mention another strategy beats use a lot, along with a lot of other electronic gadgets, product placement. It seems so pointless and trivial. I'm confident this has no effect on me whatsoever (at least on a conscious level it doesn't). I doubt it works on anyone really, yet it's becoming more and more prominent. Well I guess they know what they're doing, their numbers speak for themselves.

 

[LosMerengues]

Just saw nullstring's post and I whole heartedly agree, I think if headphone companies were to be more aggressive with their marketing the increased competition will probably lead to better headphones for us, it would definitely force companies like beats, bose and skullcandy to either lower their prices or increase the quality of their product.

 

[nullstring]

Quote:

....product placement. It seems so pointless and trivial. I'm confident this has no effect on me whatsoever (at least on a conscious level it doesn't). I doubt it works on anyone really, yet it's becoming more and more prominent. Well I guess they know what they're doing, their numbers speak for themselves.

I completely disagree. I bet it has more effect than most things do.
Product placement has been going on forever. It's just recently that headphones, phones, and computers were advertised this way.., but cars, soda, cigarettes, etc. have been in things forever..

 

[LosMerengues]

Quote:

I completely disagree. I bet it has more effect than most things do.
Product placement has been going on forever. It's just recently that headphones, phones, and computers were advertised this way.., but cars, soda, cigarettes, etc. have been in things forever..

 
I don't know, it may do, but whenever I see a music video or a movie nowadays the product placement makes me want to cringe. Interesting you should bring up cars though, you do often hear people say 'omg this car was used in this movie, it's so epic' or stuff along those lines. So it probably does help boost a products 'cool' rating.

 

[LingLing1337]

 
Quote:

I would SO buy a Kraftwerk or Jamiroquai headphone

 

If you keep your eyes peeled, you may be able to find a pair of those Jamiroquai Oakleys 

 

[Great Sound]

Maybe US head fiers arent REALLY affected by marketing,but imagine this:
Youre an every day duuude with almost no expierce/knowledge in headphones whatsoever.
You walk into a mell lets say and see a HUGE bose ad,go to the store see the price and talk to the stupid dumb salesman who knows nothing but tries his best to get you to buy his CR*P(OMD DUUUDE these sound awesomee lotttz of basss .Most people think :expensive+being displayed on a large piece of paper in a mall

+some stupid saleman=best (sound)quality ever.(us "enthousiasts" know better)
dont you see?Its the innocent we have to protect!The unsuspecting costumer!
We should set up headphone schools(also hifi schools because I hate "dislike" logitech speakers)
EDIT:
 
Quote:LingLing1337

If you keep your eyes peeled, you may be able to find a pair of those Jamiroquai Oakleys 

WHOA can these also be used for bicycling I always get tears or bees in(YES IN) my eyes while riding,I didnt know oakley made these

(my other bike glasses broke...)
Thx ALOT now I cant sleep tonight

 

 

[mark2410]

no one is immune, just it doesnt always have the intended effect.
 
if i see any terrible adverts i make a point of not buying that product as a result or if they change it to some stupid name.  like when coco pops changed or opal fruits.  sales tanked.
 
"In 1998, the British arm of Kellogg's renamed the brand in the UK "Choco Krispies" so it would be similar to the way the product was branded in the rest of the world. Sales quickly declined and research carried out by the company found that 92% of the population wanted the name changed back to Coco Pops. Kellogg's reverted to the original name in 1999."

 

[LizardKing1]

Is there such thing as no marketing? Of course we're affected by marketing. If count indirect marketing, not made by the company in question, Head-Fi'ers are incredibly influenced. Every single review could be considered a way of selling something - that's not the intention, of course, but it does make some a lot of people make a final decision. I had never tried a Fiio E7 before I bought one, I'm glad I did. I had never tried the Sure SRH750 and I bought them, and I'm glad I did. I have never tried the HiFiman RE-Zero and I am going to buy them, and hopefully I will also be glad I did.
 
Now to answer that question of yours that got me thinking: if Zach Condon (Beirut) was to endorse some beautiful, wooden Grados or Sennheisers that costed 500$... I would be incredibly tempted, but I would still read all the reviews I could find. It's easy: just think "this artist wants me to enjoy his music as much as possible, and if these headphones, endorsed by him, cant fulfil that aspect, I'm sure he would understand and support my choice. Or, like most people, you can think "f*ck his opinion, he's not the one buying this" and buy whatever YOU want.

 

[rhythmdevils]

No on is immune to all marketing, it is used everywhere, we market ourselves to each other.  But there is dishonest and honest marketing and I think they are very different.  Honest marketing is more like effective communication- product pictures that accurately depict your product and give it a feeling that captures the way your product is actually used, and statements that do the same.  And dishonest marketing is more like manipulation and propaganda.  The way Beats makes their phones out to be more than they are, and sells them not simply as good headphones like Hifiman or Sennheiser, but as icons of a lifestyle that you can buy into- the Dr Dre, rapper, gansta, whatever lifestyle.  (Sennheiser does a bit of this but not nearly as much)
 
I'm pretty immune to dishonest marketing and I will actively avoid products that use it even if they are decent.  I would not want Beats no matter how good they actually were because I don't want to "buy into a lifestyle" I just want headphones.  Problem is that not buying into a lifestyle is in itself a lifestyle, and big corporations will take advantage of that.  Like the Bloomingdales' shopping bags that just say "big brown bag" instead of their brand (they are branding using anti-brand sentiments), or an ice cream company that might intentionally make their labels look homemade and ghetto because they've noticed a buying trend that avoids fancy labels because the small companies make better ice cream.  Or you can look at how style trends constantly push away from corporate endorsement like the grundge and recent thrift store trends, but then companies just make their clothes look like old stuff you'd find at a thrift store.  And then the trend collapses because it becomes meaningless when the 7 year old girl can dress that way by going to Target.
 
So it's pretty hard to avoid it all in the end.  If you avoid marketing, they will market "avoidance" to you.  The only way is to constantly adjust and read labels. 

 

[LizardKing1]

Wow, great post, I had never thought about all those aspects put together. But even that kind of marketing you mentioned, the one where they market thinking about anti-marketing feelings, is also a hardcore kind of marketing. I really like companies trying to sell you headphones, and not a way of living, or something you can relate to, or a gateway into being something you wish you were. You can put Pierce Brosnan and Carmen Electra (I'm assuming they're still hot) wearing headphones, but in the end, most people here realize those don't get included in the package and a frequency response graph is much more important.

 

[RexAeterna]

pretty much yes. i don't even give into so called ''audiophile'' claims and marketing. i let my ears make the decision. not anyone or anything else.

 

[roma101]

Quote:

Marketing is called marketing for a reason... it makes us want to buy stuff, audiophile or not
 
I don't care who Monster uses to endorse its products. If their headphones are good, I would buy it.
 
Of course, I would still be having the guilt knowing that I will be supporting the company who tried to sue Monsters Inc...

Holy crap I had no idea. That's just horrible. *shakes head* Love that movie. 

 

[roma101]

Quote:

No on is immune to all marketing, it is used everywhere, we market ourselves to each other.  But there is dishonest and honest marketing and I think they are very different.  Honest marketing is more like effective communication- product pictures that accurately depict your product and give it a feeling that captures the way your product is actually used, and statements that do the same.  And dishonest marketing is more like manipulation and propaganda.  The way Beats makes their phones out to be more than they are, and sells them not simply as good headphones like Hifiman or Sennheiser, but as icons of a lifestyle that you can buy into- the Dr Dre, rapper, gansta, whatever lifestyle.  (Sennheiser does a bit of this but not nearly as much)
 
I'm pretty immune to dishonest marketing and I will actively avoid products that use it even if they are decent.  I would not want Beats no matter how good they actually were because I don't want to "buy into a lifestyle" I just want headphones.  Problem is that not buying into a lifestyle is in itself a lifestyle, and big corporations will take advantage of that.  Like the Bloomingdales' shopping bags that just say "big brown bag" instead of their brand (they are branding using anti-brand sentiments), or an ice cream company that might intentionally make their labels look homemade and ghetto because they've noticed a buying trend that avoids fancy labels because the small companies make better ice cream.  Or you can look at how style trends constantly push away from corporate endorsement like the grundge and recent thrift store trends, but then companies just make their clothes look like old stuff you'd find at a thrift store.  And then the trend collapses because it becomes meaningless when the 7 year old girl can dress that way by going to Target.
 
So it's pretty hard to avoid it all in the end.  If you avoid marketing, they will market "avoidance" to you.  The only way is to constantly adjust and read labels. 

Great post indeed. Very well stated.
 

 

[Thursday]

Heh, most people have covered what I was going to say. A lot of today's marketing just doesn't stand out. Every headphone manufacturer's website throws around terms like "premium sound," "hi-fi," or "professional audio" to the point that such terms become meaningless. Celebrity endorsements are cool, but in my opinion those only tend to swing the "unthinking masses" towards a product. If anything, bombarding me with advertisements has just made me extremely wary and cynical. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, either.

 
Quote:

Headphone companies don't spend enough effort appealing to the mainstream.
 
 
I think it'd be cool if they headphone companies partnered up with a single marketing campaign.
The industry it being poisoned by Monster, skullcandy and Bose.
 

Quote:

Just saw nullstring's post and I whole heartedly agree, I think if headphone companies were to be more aggressive with their marketing the increased competition will probably lead to better headphones for us, it would definitely force companies like beats, bose and skullcandy to either lower their prices or increase the quality of their product.

Possibly. But look at the flip side. While marketing is (still) an undervalued phenomenon, it's still a tradeoff in that money that goes into marketing doesn't go into sound engineers' paychecks.

Anyways, does it really matter what beats/bose/skullcandy do? Their influence among members of the audiophile community has thus far been relatively minimal.
 

 

[bcasey25raptor]

it depends on what is advertised. personally i don't watch enough cable to see any ads. but generally i am skeptical on what they have to say. every ad claims it is the best (whatever is advertised). only one can be the greatest so i generally do my own research. i was going to buy beats not because of advertisements or celebrity deals but because someone had told me they were good. but research proved that incorrect.