[tasteful]

Turns out they actually have advantages.
 
Quote:

Any audiophile can tell you that they sound like $39 headphones. Instead, consider these. We can prove they sound better!​

But of course, that's not the question. It's not what sounds better, it's what's worth it.​

 
Hit the link for the whole thing.

 

[Argyris]

Erm...I see that he's trying to be clever, but I don't quite buy it. The overwhelming majority of people who buy from high visibility brands do so because the marketing people told them to, either for looks or sound. They lack the sophistication, experience, general degree of awareness/concern, or some combination of the three to distinguish a good headphone from a bad one. (And for the sake of the argument, we'll define a "good" headphone as one whose designers intended to produce a quality product, not merely to capitalize on the ignorance of the masses, maximize product margins, and/or move units). In essence, they are not making the decision. They are allowing somebody else with a strong voice to make that decision for them and are merely consenting to directive or consensus.
 
I on the other hand buy the headphones I deem the best for me, based not on marketing (is there a single company that won't tell you its cans are the best?) but on standards that are unique to me. I don't need Monster or Bose (or beyerdynamic or Shure, for that matter) to tell me what I think sounds good. I have not been "cleverly marketed to" in my search for fidelity. I didn't need somebody to tell me that fidelity is a good thing to have. I already knew this and decided it for myself.
 
If the end result ("feeling good") is congruent between typical headphone buyers and me, it says nothing about the motivation involved. With people, motivation is everything. The passive and gregarious (in its original sense, meaning "to seek the herd") are motivated by what other people think is good and merely accept such judgment as their own. The choices of the active, savvy, and discriminative are motivated by their own judgment.

 

[shigzeo]

Whether you want the gregarious pop phone, or the audiophile precise instrument, in the end, you succumb to some sort of marketing. It ain't one way at all. I applaud companies that bring headphones, as products, back into the consumers minds. The audiophile notion that anything endorsed by the pop machine is bad, is puerile.

 

[ShawnSmith]

Quote:

Whether you want the gregarious pop phone, or the audiophile precise instrument, in the end, you succumb to some sort of marketing. It ain't one way at all. I applaud companies that bring headphones, as products, back into the consumers minds. The audiophile notion that anything endorsed by the pop machine is bad, is puerile.

I agree completely. Audiophiles tend to stick their collective nose up and look down on people that buy items like the beats and bose. They claim that they are just falling for marketing spin, or just buying popular items for some sense of belonging (fashion, etc). Yet they seem to lack any sense of self awareness with respect to their own tendencies to fall for the same tricks. How often is a new flavor of the month endorsed by the audiophile media, and subsequently gobbled up by the audiophile masses? They don't call it a flavor of the month because it rarely happens. Audiophiles just tend to think they are so much more sophisticated with their purchases. Fact of the matter is most of them are buying for the exact same reasons that those they look down on are buying for. They can just fall back on the old "well it really does sound better" argument and then they can sleep well knowing they are the more sophisticated buyer.

 

[Welly Wu]

I am going to buy the Beats Pro. Does that make me less sophisticated? I doubt it. I want good sound regardless of brand. Please take a look at my Head-Fi profile.
 
Head-Fi members are young and foolish. This has been proven time and time again with scams and repeated purchasing of the flavor of the month. If Bose and Monster audio started to produce award winning headphones and headphone amplifiers, then we will see them become the next flavor of the month once word gets out that these two companies took audiophiles seriously by offering competitive products.
 
Actually, this has already happened.

 

[Argyris]

Quote:

Quote:

Whether you want the gregarious pop phone, or the audiophile precise instrument, in the end, you succumb to some sort of marketing. It ain't one way at all. I applaud companies that bring headphones, as products, back into the consumers minds. The audiophile notion that anything endorsed by the pop machine is bad, is puerile.

I agree completely. Audiophiles tend to stick their collective nose up and look down on people that buy items like the beats and bose. They claim that they are just falling for marketing spin, or just buying popular items for some sense of belonging (fashion, etc). Yet they seem to lack any sense of self awareness with respect to their own tendencies to fall for the same tricks. How often is a new flavor of the month endorsed by the audiophile media, and subsequently gobbled up by the audiophile masses? They don't call it a flavor of the month because it rarely happens. Audiophiles just tend to think they are so much more sophisticated with their purchases. Fact of the matter is most of them are buying for the exact same reasons that those they look down on are buying for. They can just fall back on the old "well it really does sound better" argument and then they can sleep well knowing they are the more sophisticated buyer.

I can see your point, and I'll admit that FOTM does happen. M50 anyone? 

 (I'm not saying they're bad, just...you know, infamously hyped around here). Not to mention the Machina Dynamica kinds of stuff audiophiles will believe. You've also forgotten "new toy syndrome/fanboyism," where people go around recommending their new headphone to everybody and saying how it's the absolute best and/or trashing anybody who doesn't agree. 
 
I don't consider audiophiles in general as acting different from any other group, incidentally. My comments above were limited to myself. If anybody reading doesn't believe that audiophiles can fall for some real malarkey, just tour the audiophile hideouts all over the Internet. Sometimes I forget that not everybody is as much of a cynic as me. I might have followed a different trajectory than they typical Head-Fi'er in that I never visited the forums openly until I had already found a headphone that I liked. I just used this place for information, tried out a few different things until one stuck, and then joined up here. In effect, I used Head-Fi like a directed search tool instead of a forum, and as such I was isolated from a lot of the community aspects of Head-Fi. We can be quite gregarious here, as anywhere. :sheep smiley: Sometimes it's amusing to watch what gets passed around here, though generally I find a lot of honest information, first hand experience, and knowledge here as well.
 
On the other hand, I still think that the typical audiophile is more well informed about audio than the typical consumer, and also generally is more sophisticated (not in the condescending sense) concerning the subject. That doesn't imply a rigid standard for "good," but it does imply being able to discern a little more than the Head-Fi-ism "MOAR BASS!!!!1111!!!" There's no denying that some audiophiles treasure their exclusivity and "superiority", but we must not let that sort be used to define the rest of us. Remember, the word "audiophile" simply means "one who loves to hear" (a hybrid of Latin and Greek, incidentally)--there's nothing in there about shutting out other people.