[Redtoo]

Hey as anyone of tried looking up the resale value of the beats, then looked up the resale value of most headphones on here. Just checking. You guys complain about durability. I had to replace my m-50s 1/8 in adapter after 2 weeks after buying it from a guitar center, Pro 900s driver stopped working 1 week after purchase, luckily again replaced but 1 month ago the stock cord stopped didn't bother to replace it, just bought a connecter for the stock 1/4in cord. Beats problem, lost once screw came off 5 months after purchased, monster replaced the whole product. I didnt lose a penny on the beats owned them 6 months, sold the the exact price i got them for. Ive had to spend money on replacing my m-50 pads and pro 900s resale value pisses me off. O by the way just because a product is durable on the outside doesn't mean it is on the inside. Stuff can move and break on the inside, learned this with my m-50s. What i'm trying to get at here is that there is a lot of talk on this site. Keep doing research and go with what your most comfortable with purchasing. I doubt you can sell a beats knock off for the same price you bought it for. 
 
Edit: O and coming to head-fi is like going to a site dedicated to people who love their PC's talored to them, they will always hate apple. 

 

[Eric_C]

Just to clarify my point about B&W: I did not mean to equate the company's age with the quality of its products. I only wanted to point out that, as a brand, it's established, and comparing the much younger Beats brand to it as being "essentially the same" (more style than substance) does the British brand a disservice. That's all.
 
A company that manages to stay around only really proves that it understands its market. So, to the earlier (and I daresay straw man) point about Bose having poor products but age? Their sound reproduction isn't top notch, but their noise cancellation is, and they've proved that there is a willing and able market for that. The rest of their products today seem to ride off the success of that one key product; based on what I've read though, in the early days Bose was well-regarded for its sound reproduction, but that's another story.
 
Quote:

Edit: O and coming to head-fi is like going to a site dedicated to people who love their PC's talored to them, they will always hate apple. 

Not true.
I use a lot of Apple products. Macbook, iPod, iPhone, iPad, routers. Lot of Head-Fi'ers do too, and I mean the regulars/old-timers. I don't adore Apple, but I definitely don't hate the company.

 

[Ishcabible]

B&W can make some seriously awesome stuff. I listened to a Nautilus system a while back and it was glorious. The thing about speaker companies and headphones is that speakers are farther from headphones than most people would be led to believe. In fact, many of the popular headphone companies such as AKG, Audio Technica, apparently Audez'e, and Beyerdynamic make microphones, which are closer to headphone than speaker are to headphones.  I'm not completely surprised the P5's weren't exactly a revolution (although I did like a pair I heard that was well worn) because that's just not B&W's thing. They do know how to make something sound good, but making an EPIC sounding portable wouldn't be as financially prudent as making something that looks elegant and sounds "good enough." 
 
Wasn't Bose's claim to fame the original 901? The older 501 sounds okay too. They're fairly common at thrift stores and don't usually go for much, so they're a good gateway for the especially cheap.
 
I'm pretty sure there are a lot of Apple fans here, it's just that the haters tend to be more vocal. I'll admit I never really liked Apple stuff due to the price/performance ratio, but for a durable laptop with decent battery life, the MB Pro doesn't seem like a terrible option for me, not that I want to turn this into an Apple thread, because we have enough of those that stem from Beats threads.

 

[LizardKing1]

Quote:

Hey as anyone of tried looking up the resale value of the beats, then looked up the resale value of most headphones on here. Just checking. You guys complain about durability. I had to replace my m-50s 1/8 in adapter after 2 weeks after buying it from a guitar center, Pro 900s driver stopped working 1 week after purchase, luckily again replaced but 1 month ago the stock cord stopped didn't bother to replace it, just bought a connecter for the stock 1/4in cord. Beats problem, lost once screw came off 5 months after purchased, monster replaced the whole product. I didnt lose a penny on the beats owned them 6 months, sold the the exact price i got them for. Ive had to spend money on replacing my m-50 pads and pro 900s resale value pisses me off. O by the way just because a product is durable on the outside doesn't mean it is on the inside. Stuff can move and break on the inside, learned this with my m-50s. What i'm trying to get at here is that there is a lot of talk on this site. Keep doing research and go with what your most comfortable with purchasing. I doubt you can sell a beats knock off for the same price you bought it for. 
 
Edit: O and coming to head-fi is like going to a site dedicated to people who love their PC's talored to them, they will always hate apple. 

You had a bad experience with what are agnolaged to be good headphones, and a bad experience with what we consider bad headphones. And that is completely valid to form the opinion you now have. But understand that statistically, that's not the common occurrence. There are a lot more complaints of Beats breaking than of M50s or Pro 900s stop working. And I can assure, as far as retail goes in the long run, the Beats won't pay off. Once this fad is over, in about 3 years or so, the Beats will hardy be worth a dime, while the Pro900s in good condition will be worth a bit.
 
As for the Apple comparison, I understand what you mean, and you're not completely wrong - some people here will hate some brands just because of their history, or marketing schemes, the same way PC fanboys will hate Apple just for being Apple, regardless of the quality of its products. But I think Head-Fi is mostly audiophiles - audio lovers - who will like good sound over some brand association. If a brand creates 1 good headphone and 6 bad ones, that one will be recommended regardless of the rest. Look at Sony: they hardly created anything worth mentioning in the last years, and yet the Qualia is still very highly regarded. I don't hate Beats because they aren't my definition of what an audio company should be, I couldn't care less about that. I just think their headphones suck and they insist on marketing them as the greatest thing ever.

 

[WhiteCrow]

Quote:

.
I use a lot of Apple products. Macbook, iPod, iPhone, iPad, routers. Lot of Head-Fi'ers do too, and I mean the regulars/old-timers. I don't adore Apple, but I definitely don't hate the company.

sorry to get more off topic here but. Paying for Free BDSM, G-nome, and Ciro Dock as an OS is just laughably devious. Then building a regular PC that uses specific chip sets that was rarely manufactured by first party companies so replacements/upgrades are extremely costly and hard to find is just even more devious. Yep apple is a much better product, instead of being a PC it's a PC that's hard to find/ buy parts for.
 
In short, this is why I hate apple. They charge a ridiculous premium for a home computer but get away with it by saying it's designed better. When in actuality most apples fall behind the times in a year or two people just don't realize it because They did do one thing fantastic and fix the OS "rotting" problem.

 

[Eric_C]

Quote:

sorry to get more off topic here but. Paying for Free BDSM, G-nome, and Ciro Dock as an OS is just laughably devious. Then building a regular PC that uses specific chip sets that was rarely manufactured by first party companies so replacements/upgrades are extremely costly and hard to find is just even more devious. Yep apple is a much better product, instead of being a PC it's a PC that's hard to find/ buy parts for.
 
In short, this is why I hate apple. They charge a ridiculous premium for a home computer but get away with it by saying it's designed better. When in actuality most apples fall behind the times in a year or two people just don't realize it because They did do one thing fantastic and fix the OS "rotting" problem.

Sorry, but most of that really flew over my head. I don't know what BDSM, G-nome or Ciro Dock are. And are you saying that the consumer is "laughably devious" for paying for those things? If that's the case I really don't understand why a consumer is devious for buying something that you think is bad value.
 
I'm just saying I use a bunch of Apple products. I neither love nor hate the company.

 

[LizardKing1]

Quote:

Sorry, but most of that really flew over my head. I don't know what BDSM, G-nome or Ciro Dock are. And are you saying that the consumer is "laughably devious" for paying for those things? If that's the case I really don't understand why a consumer is devious for buying something that you think is bad value.
 
I'm just saying I use a bunch of Apple products. I neither love nor hate the company.

I think he meant Apple has devious commercial practices. The consumer is not to blame except for not digging deep enough to uncover these practices. The problem here is, and I say this with certainly more ignorance on computers than you, is that on every "PC vs Mac" debate, there's never a definite answer, and both sides seem to have their beliefs very well based. The consumer is as much to blame as someone is for buying the Beats, although if you just google "headphones forum" and then search for Beats in that forum, you quickly understand how much of a bad deal they are*.
 
I know very little about the core differences between a PC and a Mac, but from what I can gather from endless derails debates, Macs are much harder to get repaired since the parts aren't as widely available. However, Macs also have a larger average lifespan.
 
*Or, you know, you just put them on your head and draw your own conclusions

 

[Redtoo]

Quote:

I think he meant Apple has devious commercial practices. The consumer is not to blame except for not digging deep enough to uncover these practices. The problem here is, and I say this with certainly more ignorance on computers than you, is that on every "PC vs Mac" debate, there's never a definite answer, and both sides seem to have their beliefs very well based. The consumer is as much to blame as someone is for buying the Beats, although if you just google "headphones forum" and then search for Beats in that forum, you quickly understand how much of a bad deal they are*.
 
I know very little about the core differences between a PC and a Mac, but from what I can gather from endless derails debates, Macs are much harder to get repaired since the parts aren't as widely available. However, Macs also have a larger average lifespan.
 
*Or, you know, you just put them on your head and draw your own conclu

But then the hardware is out of date very quickly. I don't buy the life span arguement cause ive had my laptop for 5 years and it was out of date within 2 years. Even Steve Jobs said they succeed because of their software and not hardware. They just like making a ton more off their hardware.  

 

[WhiteCrow]

The software is a conglomeration of three FREE programs Free BDSM as the "bare bones" to the OS, G-nome is the meat to it. G-nome is really what makes the apple OS special, it's a rather complex set of codes that are efficient at holding a system together with minimum redundancy. This is also Memory efficient so the computer does have more available RAM to use when on. Cairo Dock is the the GUI or skin. Apple does tweak these programs to work a bit differently and make them their own but it's possible to create an exact functional and running replica of the apple OS with these programs.  As the for the "rotting" windows is so prone to, yea its really annoying but a simple back-up and reformat is easy enough and can be done by anybody, were as to my knowledge you must have an apple engineer reformat a MAC product still.
Maybe I should try to install Gentoo*I hope some one get's this joke*
 
 
 
Also I was reading further up about the Bose 501 system. I found one at a local thrift store!!! It did sound decent. They wanted like $150 for it simply for the fact it has the words BOSE stamped on it. I also found some rather old Pioneer floor speakers. Vintage from the 70's with 5 Speakers, 1 sub 2 mid's and 2 tweeters. Anyone heard of these?

 

[Dubstep Girl]

bet the pioneers sound better and cost less than the bose

 

[Eric_C]

Whitecrow: so, how much computing would one have to know, in order to stitch those programs together on top of Unix (which OS X is based on, right?)...?

I trust you see where I'm going with this. If OS X is a ripoff because it can be recreated for free, but the recreation requires skills that the general public (myself included) don't have, then it perhaps it's not a ripoff to them. Additionally, even if it's not that difficult to learn how to do it, one must account for available time and inclination--I've got a day job, so I don't have or want to set aside time to learn how to setup the software of a computer. For eg, if I were to build a Windows gaming rig right now, I wouldn't even assemble it myself, I'd just pay a store to do it for me.

 

[nikp]

Quote:

Whitecrow: so, how much computing would one have to know, in order to stitch those programs together on top of Unix (which OS X is based on, right?)...?
I trust you see where I'm going with this. If OS X is a ripoff because it can be recreated for free, but the recreation requires skills that the general public (myself included) don't have, then it perhaps it's not a ripoff to them. Additionally, even if it's not that difficult to learn how to do it, one must account for available time and inclination--I've got a day job, so I don't have or want to set aside time to learn how to setup the software of a computer. For eg, if I were to build a Windows gaming rig right now, I wouldn't even assemble it myself, I'd just pay a store to do it for me.

OSX isn't a rip off. It's $25 compared to Windows and is basically a good looking Linux with awesome software compatibility.
 

 

[Eric_C]

Quote:

OSX isn't a rip off. It's $25 compared to Windows and is basically a good looking Linux with awesome software compatibility.
 

Whoops sorry, I got it wrong about OS X being Unix-based? So it's Linux-based eh?

 

[nikp]

Quote:

Whoops sorry, I got it wrong about OS X being Unix-based? So it's Linux-based eh?

Sarcasm noted. It's UNIX based but I see similarities in OSX and Linux. I'm a Mac user but I use PC and Ubuntu sometimes during the week.
 

 

[Eric_C]

What? No I wasn't being sarcastic, I really wasn't sure whether it runs on Unix or Linux. I've never dealt with either of those OS before.