[cswann1]

I've read a lot of folks say that Beats are bringing more people to the world of headphone audio. 
 
I really don't think that's the case.  I'm sure it does happen, but looking at the product and the target audience, I just don't see a lot of Beats owners suddenly deciding that they are now into hifi headphone audio and go looking for a more balanced and resolving headphone.
 
Plus, it's not like headphone audio is a super-secret underground society and you have to know someone to get in the "club".  Middle tier headphones have been in the tech/gadget media spotlight lots of times and sometimes they even cover a flagship headphone.
 
I don't care one way or another if some kid wants to blow his allowance on a lesser product. Headphone audio has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 20 years and today there is plenty of market share to go around.

 

[White Lotus]

 
I just don't see a lot of Beats owners suddenly deciding that they are now into hifi headphone audio and go looking for a more balanced and resolving headphone.

 
Some do.
 
It's also not just the owners of Beats, but those who know about them. It's just generally more socially acceptable to spend money on headphones since the Beats craze.

 

[Coq de Combat]

   
Probably try googling the conductor "Sean Olive" before questioning its validity 

Thank you. I have to admit that his name didn't answer any of my questions.

 

[62ohm]

  Thank you. I have to admit that his name didn't answer any of my questions.

 
Because you refuse to accept his & his team's research from the first place. Like I said, if the findings favored Beats I'm certain you would not hesitate to accept it and believe it as the truth. After all, Harman knows nothing and their team's research findings are not credible, right? 

 

[Coq de Combat]

   
Because you refuse to accept his & his team's research from the first place. Like I said, if the findings favored Beats I'm certain you would not hesitate to accept it and believe it as the truth. After all, Harman knows nothing and their team's research findings are not credible, right? 

 
I never said I refuse to accept their research. I never said they know nothing. I never said their findings weren't credible. I can happily accept their findings, if they give me a reason to. Disclosing more about their methods, selection of sample, and so on would be a reason. However, those slides aren't a lot to go on, and thus I have to say that I'm still sceptic. The reality is that we are talking about a company, a business, conducting research involving their competitions' products. Think of it like this: would you trust a medical company's research findings, that would indicate that their products are superior to their competitions' products? Especially when no scientifically relevant parts of the study are disclosed?
 
After all, no matter who conducts the study -- Harman, their competition, or even Feynman -- there are certain reliability and validity issues to consider before making any real assumptions from it (especially sweeping conclusions that "beats sound signature isn't preferred"). That's why methods are usually openly discussed, because there is no 'flawless' method. We wouldn't want any kind of bias going on here, right? 
 
Please do quit amusing me with putting words in my mouth though. It's not only disrespectful, petty and tasteless, but it's also rather useless.

 

[Minarets]

Quote:ThickGlasses

 I'm of the opinion that piracy is good just like I'm of the opinion that beats are good; not as headphones, but as a boost to the industry.

The real pity here is that they would far better for the industry if the beats sounded half decent.
 
Goes to show how marketing hype trumps reality in life.
 
Joseph Goebbels said that if you tell a lie long enough it becomes the truth.
 
Marketing has never recovered from this discovery.

you're in luck. they do sound good now. try tune new studio and fear not.

 

[Dillan]

This thread is ancient.  Its cool to hate beats.  (In fact I do - therefore I am cool)
 
Honestly though.. Their price to performance ratio isn't great.  They aim for bassheads, but you can spend less or the same amount and get more bass with other headphones.
 
They are more of a fashion and hip thing to buy, and this forum is for a different type of person overall than the general population of Beats consumers.  
 
Its as simple as that.   
 
I am sure if you went to a young adult oriented, trendy forum then they would generally have a different opinion.  (beat lovers!)
 
Either way, buy things because you want them.. Not because you think other people would want you to or not. 

 

[62ohm]

   
Please do quit amusing me with putting words in my mouth though. It's not only disrespectful, petty and tasteless, but it's also rather useless.

 
Stop responding, problem solved. 

 

  This thread is ancient.  Its cool to hate beats.  (In fact I do - therefore I am cool)
 
Honestly though.. Their price to performance ratio isn't great.  They aim for bassheads, but you can spend less or the same amount and get more bass with other headphones.
 
They are more of a fashion and hip thing to buy, and this forum is for a different type of person overall than the general population of Beats consumers.  
 
Its as simple as that.   
 
I am sure if you went to a young adult oriented, trendy forum then they would general have a different opinion.  (beat lovers!)
 
Either way, buy things because you want them.. Not because you think other people would want you to or not. 

 
+1

 

[Bradsnake412]

  I've read a lot of folks say that Beats are bringing more people to the world of headphone audio. 
 
I really don't think that's the case.  I'm sure it does happen, but looking at the product and the target audience, I just don't see a lot of Beats owners suddenly deciding that they are now into hifi headphone audio and go looking for a more balanced and resolving headphone.
 
Plus, it's not like headphone audio is a super-secret underground society and you have to know someone to get in the "club".  Middle tier headphones have been in the tech/gadget media spotlight lots of times and sometimes they even cover a flagship headphone.
 
I don't care one way or another if some kid wants to blow his allowance on a lesser product. Headphone audio has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 20 years and today there is plenty of market share to go around.

I use to own Beats Solo HD and now i own a pair of ATH-M50RD after researching more audio products (I research Loads haha) and love em the sound is better but that's me and i know a lot more think so to but if people want to buy something cause they want to i say good for them ^_^.

 

[Omshallom]

I feel like I'm on a merry-go-round, and I can't get off. 

 

[GearMe]

you're in luck. they do sound good now. try tune new studio and fear not.

 
That would take an open mind!  

 

[vlenbo]

Well, the beats are not terrible, at least not the modern ones (from what I've read).
 
But I don't know...if beats compete against other headphones for beauty now...
 

 

[GearMe]

It appears that 'sonic preference' is the same for everyone irrespective of age, culture, and job.
 
Got this link from another thread, try reading it from the start. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16343460/Olive%20ALMA%202014%20Winter%20Symposium%20Headphone%20Talk%20copy.key.pdf 
 
At the end of the day, Beats house sound is not preferable after all...

- Thank goodness!  Our work here is finished.
 

I'm not surprised. Still, "marketing research" with a JBL logo all over the place probably shouldn't be taken as proof, right?

   - This does seem to be a reasonable thought...right?
 

Probably try googling the conductor "Sean Olive" before questioning its validity 

   - Excellent idea...he's not only making the rounds at Symposiums/Shows/etc but he's also posting/commenting on some other forums as well.
 

Because you refuse to accept his & his team's research from the first place. Like I said, if the findings favored Beats I'm certain you would not hesitate to accept it and believe it as the truth. After all, Harman knows nothing and their team's research findings are not credible, right? 

On the surface, it seems more like you've placed an incredible amount of trust in a Vendor's 'research' findings...because they support your argument.  As Mark Twain said, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."
 
Having worked in the past as a Storage Systems Product Specialist for a very large Hardware/Software company, I can assure you that we had similar findings about our products besting our competition from Japan on all fronts.  
 
Imagine my surprise when I went to work for one of these competitors and learned that their Hard Disk products were actually better than the ones I had been 'educating' clients on previously --  their studies proved it!      SO...it had to be true.      Wait, What?      
 
Hence, the role of benchmarking standards, independent research firms, etc. in our industry.
 
Here's the funny thing, most associates in these Vendor companies and their loyal clients (on both sides) typically believed the Vendor's  'research' as Gospel and dismissed the other's as blatant lies. More often than not, it wasn't sound reasoning that swayed how these people thought and bought but emotions based on a combination of factors -- after all, 'Nobody ever got fired for buying from...'
 
Listener Preference is just that and all the dogma in the world can't refute how the market votes with their dollars.  FWIW, I don't own a pair of Beats -- never have.  But I might some day if they meet my criteria...which are different than yours and everyone else's.

 

[GearMe]

   
I never said I refuse to accept their research. I never said they know nothing. I never said their findings weren't credible. I can happily accept their findings, if they give me a reason to. Disclosing more about their methods, selection of sample, and so on would be a reason. However, those slides aren't a lot to go on, and thus I have to say that I'm still sceptic. The reality is that we are talking about a company, a business, conducting research involving their competitions' products. Think of it like this: would you trust a medical company's research findings, that would indicate that their products are superior to their competitions' products? Especially when no scientifically relevant parts of the study are disclosed?
 
After all, no matter who conducts the study -- Harman, their competition, or even Feynman -- there are certain reliability and validity issues to consider before making any real assumptions from it (especially sweeping conclusions that "beats sound signature isn't preferred"). That's why methods are usually openly discussed, because there is no 'flawless' method. We wouldn't want any kind of bias going on here, right? 
 
Please do quit amusing me with putting words in my mouth though. It's not only disrespectful, petty and tasteless, but it's also rather useless.

FYI, Since he's been discussing this on another forum, I've asked Sean Olive some basic questions to start a dialogue with him to get a better understanding of his research methodology.

 

[thievesarmy]

  I've tried just about every beats headphone.  Honestly they aren't terrible headphones.  Sure for the price there are subjectively superior headphones, but come one we all have to admit we wished our headphones looked as nice as those Beats Mixrs.
 

 
Speak for yourself there - I think Beats look extremely ugly & tacky. It's worse now that they have really caught on and so there's an over-exposure effect, but I have hated their cheap style & design from day one.