[streetdragon]

Quote:

I like EDM, and I have two 18" subs driven by 800 watts RMS in my living room. Does that count?

i think... that's more of overkill

 

[cel4145]

i think... that's more of overkill

LOL

My living room with adjacent open areas is 6,000 cubic ft. So actually, not too much overkill . . . but I can get that good club bass sound (literally) by cranking up the low end

 

[Maxx134]

Fact #1= beats ARE garbage
Fact#2= beats users ARE robbed of their value for money
Fact#3= THEIR Are better bigger bass cans out.
Fact#4 We as users who know better,
Have a moral obligation to point out injustice,
To the hoards of naive consumers before they too,
Get ripped off.
Fact#4= fashion is stronger influence than sound to the majority of society.

 

[Me x3]

Quote:

Fact#4= fashion is stronger influence than sound to the majority of society.

100 % agree

There is no such a golden sound signature discovered by Monster engineers, nor by Dr. Dre, which the majority of the people out there loves.

If someone is still believing in such a 'best seller sound signature' wich apparently you can only find in Beats by Dre, just try to explain why a lot of people here in Argentina (and I mean, most of the people I see using full sized headphones at the street) wear fake Beats by Dre.

Come on, this is all about having that 'b logo' over your head. Then most people who look at you will recognize the b logo, and you'll be 'someone with those superb headphones' for the majority of the people.

Something similar happens here with Swatch watches for ladies painted in some color similar to gold. A lot of young ladies here want a Swatch in that colour. Those who can't pay for it buy a fake one.
No one wish to have Cartier. And that is because no one of the other ladies here would recognize a Cartier as a superb watch, neither will associate that unknown watch with some kind of social status.

I don't like to generalize, there are always exemptions out there for everything you say.

After all, Beats by Dre are fashion headphones, and most fashion products are over-priced in terms of quality, but I don't think that make them a rip-off because when you buy something like that you are paying for the headphones and paying for their fame (based mainly on the marketing)

Last but not least, we can say, they are a rip off because Monster tells the people those are Hi-Fi headphones and they are not.
The box of my AKG's K44 also says Hi-Fi headphones, and for me are just good headphones, not Hi-Fi.

Hi-Fi is a quite relative term and it is used a lot comercially. I think we have nothing to do to change that.

Greetings!

 

[Bigshow33]

I'm waiting for the Yamaha Pro's! lol 

 

[money4me247]

please don't flame me, but honestly the majority of ordinary people simply cannot tell the sound difference between the Beats and another pair of headphones.
 
If you do a double-blind test, I bet the average consumer cannot accurately determine the sonic differences (outside of bass-boost) between any two headphones unless one is so poor-quality to the point that there is static/hiss. My friends who have Beats/Bose tried my V-Moda M100 and I doubt they even noticed a sound difference.
 
The average person is probably also normally listening to music on crappy computer speakers or iPod docks. The average person's source material is probably low-bitrate songs or youtube or the radio.
 
"Muddiness" is difficult to hear when you are used to excessive amounts of bass (from car stereos, club music, movie theaters, and many modern-day concerts). If you never heard unmuddy, then why would you think your sound is muddy? If you gave normal people a super-accurate balanced pair of studio headphones, they probably wouldn't enjoy it due to their perceived lack of bass. The easiest change in sound signature to detect for an untrained ear is increased bass. People can tell that the Beats have more bass than other headphones, so they equate that to being better, especially due to the marketing. Most electronics stores carry a bunch of random headphones and then have a separate premium section for Beats/Skull Candy/Bose (slash some well-marketed brand). If the stores and other non-audiophiles says that Beats are premium, you aren't going to go online to an random headphone forum to learn about other options.
 
Finally, the average consumer has different priorities when shopping for headphones. When I show off my headphones to most of my friends, they don't even bother plugging it into music. They just put it on their head to see how comfortable they are. The average consumer simply looks for comfort, noise isolation, style, and price. Sound quality is probably not even considered as many of the sound signature differences I read about on this site are probably too subtle for someone to hear with an quick A-B listen. Beats are really comfortable headphones in general and that is very appealing to consumers.
 
So, if you consider all these factors, it is perfectly reasonable that most people pick up Beats/Bose slash whatever bass-heavy headphones that are well marketed and extremely comfortable over some obscure brand of headphones that sound "different" than what they are used to. While the "different" sound signature might be better, it usually takes people a few hours to get used to changes like that. When people are looking for extra bass, they probably don't bother spending any time with accurate audiophile headphones.
 
The point is that most consumers aren't looking to maximize their sound quality per dollar or find the perfect sound signature like headphone enthusiasts, so Beats actually probably suit most average people better than the kind of headphones audiophiles adore. No need to look down your nose at them, because they have different priorities.

 

[tiznaki]

I argued with my son after he asked me for a pair of beats. He said he loved the sound, after a/b demos on a pair of my headphones he said "I like the way beats sound, also they look cool." I won the argument about him liking the fad more than the sound then I bought him some beats. lol

 

[Sound Quest]

If I knew anybody who couldn't hear the difference between a pair of Beat Solo's and a pair of Audio Technica M50's, then i'd be seriously concerned about the health of their hearing.
 
I don't think its that most people won't hear a difference (as I believe they would), its just that a lot of people will buy a pair of beats without ever planning to fork out the same amount of money for another pair of headphones again, so they will be blissfully and arrogantly unaware that they could have had so much better for their money.

 

[viralcow]

Quote:

Finally, the average consumer has different priorities when shopping for headphones. When I show off my headphones to most of my friends, they don't even bother plugging it into music. They just put it on their head to see how comfortable they are. The average consumer simply looks for comfort, noise isolation, style, and price. Sound quality is probably not even considered as many of the sound signature differences I read about on this site are probably too subtle for someone to hear with an quick A-B listen. Beats are really comfortable headphones in general and that is very appealing to consumers.

 
They don't consider sound quality when buying headphones because they believe that good sound is a given whenever they pay $300+. They just can't wrap their heads around the fact that a $300 headphone can sound bad considering its popularity, celebrity endorsements, and premium pricing... so it becomes a hindsight altogether. Then the only stuff left to worry about is style/comfort/portability.

 

[money4me247]

Quote:

If I knew anybody who couldn't hear the difference between a pair of Beat Solo's and a pair of Audio Technica M50's, then i'd be seriously concerned about the health of their hearing.
 
I don't think its that most people won't hear a difference (as I believe they would), its just that a lot of people will buy a pair of beats without ever planning to fork out the same amount of money for another pair of headphones again, so they will be blissfully and arrogantly unaware that they could have had so much better for their money.

Right, I am sure they will hear a slight sonic difference between the M50 & Beats... 
 
However, they definiately will NOT put them on and say "omg, the bass is so tight, highly-textured, and well-defined while keeping the treble and mids in balance. I really love how the M50 has accurate bass that does not bleed into the other frequencies and the treble/mids are not veiled. the trebles are sharp without being fatiguing. there is no roll-off or sibilance either. while the mids seem slightly recessed, overall the the tonal balance is very good and the soundstage is very commendable for a pair of closed headphones." Sometimes I even question how people can hear such differences.
 
The sonic difference they will hear is: "My Beats has more thumping bass. Sweet"
 
I know this because I tried this exact experiment on a bunch of people and that's what happened. Even with one friend who had professional voice lessons since she was 5 and almost pursued a career as a singer preferred her beats. I only had one musician friend who is really into producing music say that the Beats sound muddy to him, but he is kinda a headphones geek too, auditioning tons of different headphones before settling on the AKG K550. He is also way more of a treblehead than a basshead too, but he considers the Beats to be great basshead headphones as it has ridiculous over-equalization of bass.
 
Basically, this type of headphone community & the opinions held here are not reflected in the general public. When I told people purchased M100, they just look at me quizzically and asked me why I didn't buy the Beats. I've also had reactions that included suggestions getting Bose, you should just save up to get a good pair, or talking about a cool bluetooth headset that I should try. Legit trust me, most people don't care about sound quality as much as you guys think. That is why there is even a market for iPod speakers/docks, $300 bluetooth speakers, purchasing under 320kps audio tracks online, and those kinda of things.

 

[money4me247]

alsooo... this might be an unpopular opinion and I definitely do not mean any offense, but I kinda feel like a lot of people who get the M50s may have gotten them based on the many highly rated reviews about them rather than their own objective ear test. I just don't think many people went through the trouble of auditioning their M50s against other headphones for extended periods of time until you are legit a headphone geek and usually by them you find something else you like better.
 
I really feel like as you get more comfortable with the specific sound signature of your headphones/music the more you listen to them, then you psychologically begin to associate that with a "superior" sound. I found it really interesting that for me personally, I would need to spend at least 2 weeks with a pair of headphone to begin to understand its specific sound signature. Direct A-B comparisons of headphones did not unveil a lot for me even when I tried comparing very specific aspects of tracks against one another (for example just the bass section or the vocal sections). Kinda of made me wonder how much of sound is psychological or due to ears adjusting to the sound rather than hard-and-fast, this is better than that. It seems to me a lot of the audiophile terms aren't really apparent until you listen to a wide variety of music and get a sense of the specific nuances due to random striking bits of music that jump out at you. Anyways, I only mean this post to be thought-provoking as I was very surprised how subtle a lot of these audiophile concepts are compared to how they are described. I am very interested in headphones and sound science and the psychology behind how all the different components interplay: the source file being decoded, the headphones translating it into sound, the ears feeling the vibrations, and the brain processing that jumble into music that invokes emotion. Really fascinating in my opinion.

 

[Billyjoegunrack]

Quote:

 
They don't consider sound quality when buying headphones because they believe that good sound is a given whenever they pay $300+. They just can't wrap their heads around the fact that a $300 headphone can sound bad considering its popularity, celebrity endorsements, and premium pricing... so it becomes a hindsight altogether. Then the only stuff left to worry about is style/comfort/portability.

I have seen far too many people put on a set of Beats, and really like what they hear. I think some people here can't wrap their heads around the fact that there are people who really like the way these cans sound. Tastes can be very different from one person to the next, and their are people who prefer Beats to a whole slew of what most people around here would consider far superior in sound. They didn't take 25% of the whole headphone market with something that sounds terrible. These may sound terrible to most of the folks who trawl this forum, but the hip hop/rap listening masses like a different flavor, and what sounds horrible to some around here is preferable to these people. The whole marketing package, the celebrity cool factor et al put these over, into the dominant player in the headphone market. 

 

[deloving]

Someone told me this before. "Beats are good. Yeah yeah I get Sennheisers are better but they cost like $1000. I heard my friend's $350 Sennheiser headphones and they were ****. That's what I like about Beats, it's a bang for your buck. And they look good."

 

[streetdragon]

Quote:

Someone told me this before. "Beats are good. Yeah yeah I get Sennheisers are better but they cost like $1000. I heard my friend's $350 Sennheiser headphones and they were ****. That's what I like about Beats, it's a bang for your buck. And they look good."

I think he means: "That's what i like about beats, they're bass for the buck"
i would probably guess he doesn't like the flat sounding headphones, and wants a V shape with a very high left side

 

[cel4145]

I have seen far too many people put on a set of Beats, and really like what they hear. I think some people here can't wrap their heads around the fact that there are people who really like the way these cans sound.

Have you been reading this thread? The main objection to Beats is not that they sound terrible, but that there are other bass heavy headphones for around half the price that sound as good or better. Those "people who really like the way these cans sound" probably haven't listened to any of those alternatives. All of they have done is listened to what's on display at Best Buy (lol).

Of course a McDonald's Quarter Pounder with Cheese might taste the best if the only cheeseburger someone has ever tried comes from McDonald's.

So I can guarantee you if you gave those "many people" blind listening tests (so they couldn't be biased by the Beasts hype) with Beats Studios, Ultrasones, V-Modas, DT770s, and Sony XB series, a lot of them would pick something else or at least say that the other models were as good.

Speaking of which, have you tried any of those other headphones yourself? It would seem to me that anyone who has would realize that this is about price/performance value.