[mralexosborn]

I just think there are too many idiots out there funding entire companies due to their ignorance. If your product is mediocre you should have to innovate, not the case with Bose or Monster (or GM for that matter). Don't bring Skullcandies into this. They are sub-$100. They are trash but oh well what do you expect? The Beats Studio retail for $300. They sell because of marketing and bass. What does Monster produce that is respected anywhere? 

 

[swbf2cheater]

^ The Copper and Miles Davis are among the best IEMs you can get 
 
but yes, monster in general is pretty terrible, I don't think people are idiots though, just misguided and uneducated.  

 

[grokit]

Quote:

What does Monster produce that is respected anywhere? 

 

 
Miles Davis Tribute Jazz In-Ear Headphones

 

[Permagrin]

Quote:

 I don't think people are idiots though, just misguided and uneducated.  

 
I agree (I know I was lol).
 
Then there are those people who would strap subs to their ears just to get the most bass possible.
 
It may be that the greatest service we can do for the rest of humanity though is to teach them how to properly insert ear buds.
 
At the very least they may turn the volume down a wee bit so I don't have to listen to their music from 15 feet away. 

 

 

[Catharsis]

Could it be that the average consumer is just smarter and us audiophiles are crazier? 
 
I mean, many of us are paying more than $1000 for a friggin headphone....COME ON!
 
An old friend of mine works in the audio engineering circle and is involved in R and D for all kinds of things sound related.  One of our ongoing jokes is that an audio professional knows when improvements to sound stop and an audiophile doesn't.  There's a reason why even the highest end studio finds the end of the road with a pair of HD600s and/or a K701.

 

[Permagrin]

Quote:

Could it be that the average consumer is just smarter and us audiophiles are crazier? 
 
I mean, many of us are paying more than $1000 for a friggin headphone....COME ON!

 
I think we're both smarter and crazier. Does that work?
 

 

[Catharsis]

 
Quote:

Quote:

Could it be that the average consumer is just smarter and us audiophiles are crazier? 
 
I mean, many of us are paying more than $1000 for a friggin headphone....COME ON!

 
I think we're both smarter and crazier. Does that work?
 

 
Sure - I guess that works.  I can admit that the average joe doesn't know his anus from his elbow when it comes to music, both in quality and taste.  Just look at all those kids with their ibud attached to an iphone 4 listening to Nickelback.
 

 

[ProjectDenz]

Well the guy hooked up the Edition 8 up to his Macbook Pro, crappy source, crappy ampage right there. I liked how he thought that the beats were a balanced can.

 

[1Time]

This $ argument is bogus. People buy what they want - it's their money. That's called freedom, not crazy. But the average consumer is relatively uninformed / uneducated about their purchases. And marketing / advertising is very good at exploiting this.
 
Quote:

Could it be that the average consumer is just smarter and us audiophiles are crazier? 
 
I mean, many of us are paying more than $1000 for a friggin headphone....COME ON!

 

[Catharsis]

Quote:

This $ argument is bogus. People buy what they want - it's their money. That's called freedom, not crazy. But the average consumer is relatively uninformed / uneducated about their purchases. And marketing / advertising is very good at exploiting this.
 

MMM...I still call it crazy when it doesn't amount to anything of value.  That's why I don't spend money on liquid oxygen supplements.

 

[ktsai1283]

Let people buy whatever they want--it's their money, their choice.  If you agree that the quality of sound is subjective, then there's absolutely no argument and no reason for a thread title proclaiming ("proving") that the average consumer is "deaf".
 
For example, from reading various threads around here, I'm certain there are quite a few respected members who would take the Beats over any Grado, any day.  Are they deaf?  Does that frustrate you?  Sure, the sound of the Beats is colored, but what heaphone isn't?  And what about Grado?  Why is somebody's decision to purchase one of the most colored headphones simply because s/he enjoys its sound so much more respectable than someone who purchases the Beats for the same reason?  A basshead who purchases a DT 770 Pro for its bass would definitely not get as much crap from this forum as someone who purchases the Beats for the same reason.  Seriously, the attitude that some people have around here has got to stop.
 
One thing you should not do is look down your nose at these people.  The best thing would be to inform them, but ultimately understand that the choice is theirs.  Getting angry and frustrated over trivial things like people's purchasing decisions only makes you and the people involved in this hobby look bad.
 
By the way, I don't mean to single you out, as there have been plenty of threads about this same topic (noted above).

 

[Catharsis]

 
Quote:

Let people buy whatever they want--it's their money, their choice.  If you agree that the quality of sound is subjective, then there's absolutely no argument and no reason for a thread title proclaiming ("proving") that the average consumer is "deaf".
 
For example, from reading various threads around here, I'm certain there are quite a few respected members who would take the Beats over any Grado, any day.  Are they deaf?  Does that frustrate you?  Sure, the sound of the Beats is colored, but what heaphone isn't?  And what about Grado?  Why is somebody's decision to purchase one of the most colored headphones simply because s/he enjoys its sound so much more respectable than someone who purchases the Beats for the same reason?  A basshead who purchases a DT 770 Pro for its bass would definitely not get as much crap from this forum as someone who purchases the Beats for the same reason.  Seriously, the attitude that some people have around here has got to stop.
 
One thing you should not do is look down your nose at these people.  The best thing would be to inform them, but ultimately understand that the choice is theirs.  Getting angry and frustrated over trivial things like people's purchasing decisions only makes you and the people involved in this hobby look bad.
 
By the way, I don't mean to single you out, as there have been plenty of threads about this same topic (noted above).

 
Are you singling me out? 
 
I agree with you, and I may have been misunderstood.  Depending on your point of view, you could call someone who spends $1000 on headphones silly, as much as you could call someone who just walked out of a store with Monster beats silly.  Either way, the 2 cancel each other out; it's like the pot calling the kettle black.  In the end it does come down to personal choice.
On t
What makes me sad though is how much marketing drives sales of things that may or may not actually offer something better.  All it takes is for Monster to make a $300 headphone and slap Dr. Dre's name on it and people will buy it without even exploring the world of headphones manufactuered by companies with decades more experience in headphone technology.  On the other hand, companies like AKG call it quits at $300 with their stellar K701, whereas other companies see how much money they can squeeze out of their fans with offerings like the Edition 9. 
 
I work in the field of nutritional science, and if I said that watching people buy liquid oxygen supplements doesn't make me a tad angry I'd be lying.  Sure they can spend money how they want, but what they're doing is wasting it.
 

 

[InnerSpace]

People buy what they like - they have a target in mind and they aim for it.  Our problem is that there isn't a single, defined target in audio.  For about 75 years audio "quality" has diverged along separate and unrelated lines ... everyone is heading down a different rabbit hole.  Bose does well because its warm, muffled, chesty signature reminds people of old table radios, and that kind of sound represents what is "good" for some ... crunchy, bass-heavy MP3s and brash phones sound "good" to others, because of club systems and car stereos.  And so on.
 
And as for us - we all spend a lot of time disagreeing among a small sub-set of targets.  Obviously I think we're closer to real satisfaction than them ... but don't forget in the other 99% of our lives we're totally oblivious to things that might matter greatly to others ... cars, clothes, whatever.  Maybe someone saw one of us coming out of a record store and blogged, "I can't believe what that dork was wearing ... it makes me so mad people like that don't know the difference, etc, etc."

 

[grokit]

I know a guy who cured his terminal inoperable cancer with a combination of liquid oxygen and ozone therapy, YMMV.

 

[buffalowings]

Quote:

People buy what they like - they have a target in mind and they aim for it.  Our problem is that there isn't a single, defined target in audio.  For about 75 years audio "quality" has diverged along separate and unrelated lines ... everyone is heading down a different rabbit hole.  Bose does well because its warm, muffled, chesty signature reminds people of old table radios, and that kind of sound represents what is "good" for some ... crunchy, bass-heavy MP3s and brash phones sound "good" to others, because of club systems and car stereos.  And so on.
 
And as for us - we all spend a lot of time disagreeing among a small sub-set of targets.  Obviously I think we're closer to real satisfaction than them ... but don't forget in the other 99% of our lives we're totally oblivious to things that might matter greatly to others ... cars, clothes, whatever.  Maybe someone saw one of us coming out of a record store and blogged, "I can't believe what that dork was wearing ... it makes me so mad people like that don't know the difference, etc, etc."

clothing wise...I'm a grade A moron...