[forestitalia]

I bought sz2000 to watch movies and I'm really happy, amazing with special audio effects and good isolation.
I think that with music such as electronic with real sub-sub bass those are pretty exciting, but after a while need a break to avoid my mind blows

 

[derbigpr]

The whole "beats suck" thing was blown way out of proportion even back when they weren't really all that good, truthfully they were never as HORRIBLE as some people made them out to be, they were just very overpriced at first, but the 2nd and especially the 3rd generations of Studio's and Solo's fixed that. Yet, the public opinion stuck because certain types of people like to judge things without trying them on their own, in fact, a lot of people like doing that nowadays, which is why these opinions can spread like a plague and it's hard to get rid of them once they're no longer valid. We even reached a point where saying "beats suck" was used by some people to show that they know a lot about headphones, and the issues with that started when Beats stopped sucking, but those same people didn't stop repeating that they sucked, because they never tried the headphones in the first place and kept on believing that their opinions of those headphones were still true, even though they were just repeating what someone else, in most cases equally inexperienced, said to them.

The point is... Beats are, at this moment, nowhere near being bad products, and they're actually among the better headphones in their categories. You'd be truly hard pressed to find a much better sounding on-ear headphone than the Solo 3 for example, with the same features, same type of headphone, same portability, isolation, ease to drive, etc. at the same price. Their slightly bass heavy sound signature might not be your personal thing, but there's no denying that what they do, they do well and you won't exactly get ripped off if you buy them. They're tuned to work best with certain types of music, which happens to be exactly the kind of music their target audience listens to a lot (who would have thought...). You don't buy Beats to listen to classical or jazz, do you...

 

[Slim1970]

The whole "beats suck" thing was blown way out of proportion even back when they weren't really all that good, truthfully they were never as HORRIBLE as some people made them out to be, they were just very overpriced at first, but the 2nd and especially the 3rd generations of Studio's and Solo's fixed that. Yet, the public opinion stuck because certain types of people like to judge things without trying them on their own, in fact, a lot of people like doing that nowadays, which is why these opinions can spread like a plague and it's hard to get rid of them once they're no longer valid. We even reached a point where saying "beats suck" was used by some people to show that they know a lot about headphones, and the issues with that started when Beats stopped sucking, but those same people didn't stop repeating that they sucked, because they never tried the headphones in the first place and kept on believing that their opinions of those headphones were still true, even though they were just repeating what someone else, in most cases equally inexperienced, said to them.

The point is... Beats are, at this moment, nowhere near being bad products, and they're actually among the better headphones in their categories. You'd be truly hard pressed to find a much better sounding on-ear headphone than the Solo 3 for example, with the same features, same type of headphone, same portability, isolation, ease to drive, etc. at the same price.

Couldn’t agree more. I like to judge headphones based on sound instead of price. There are some very good headphones in all the price ranges and with that in mind Beats are good headphones for what they are. I went to Best Buy and tried out the B&W PX, B&O H9’s and the Beats Solo 3’s. I was surprised that I liked the Beats more than the other two headphones from a sound standpoint. The Beats more than held their own. The only thing the other two headphones were better at was build quality. If I didn’t know that there better headphones out there I could be happy with a set of Beats. They really have come a long way from the boomy, muddy bass and high distortion headphone brand they use to be.

 

[Spareribs]

I tried Beats headphones once and it was on a recording I was familiar with. I have to admit, it was pretty bad. But if you like that sound and if it fits with your style of music , then go on and buy it.

So if its for you, do it!

 

[hifi80sman]

The whole "beats suck" thing was blown way out of proportion even back when they weren't really all that good, truthfully they were never as HORRIBLE as some people made them out to be, they were just very overpriced at first, but the 2nd and especially the 3rd generations of Studio's and Solo's fixed that. Yet, the public opinion stuck because certain types of people like to judge things without trying them on their own, in fact, a lot of people like doing that nowadays, which is why these opinions can spread like a plague and it's hard to get rid of them once they're no longer valid. We even reached a point where saying "beats suck" was used by some people to show that they know a lot about headphones, and the issues with that started when Beats stopped sucking, but those same people didn't stop repeating that they sucked, because they never tried the headphones in the first place and kept on believing that their opinions of those headphones were still true, even though they were just repeating what someone else, in most cases equally inexperienced, said to them.

The point is... Beats are, at this moment, nowhere near being bad products, and they're actually among the better headphones in their categories. You'd be truly hard pressed to find a much better sounding on-ear headphone than the Solo 3 for example, with the same features, same type of headphone, same portability, isolation, ease to drive, etc. at the same price. Their slightly bass heavy sound signature might not be your personal thing, but there's no denying that what they do, they do well and you won't exactly get ripped off if you buy them. They're tuned to work best with certain types of music, which happens to be exactly the kind of music their target audience listens to a lot (who would have thought...). You don't buy Beats to listen to classical or jazz, do you...

For on-ear, the Solo3 are a very solid option. The only issue I have is the price, but to each their own. For what they do and given the multitude of options out now, I wouldn't pay more than $150. The build quality is nothing to write home about, but they don't sound bad (actually, they sound good) and they are one of the better headphones for the gym.

As for the Studio3, I actually purchased and returned them several times, for a variety of reasons, but I recently picked up the Porcelain Rose color at Target on clearance for $104. I have to admit, for that price, I'm definitely enjoying them. Using the Spotify app on iOS, you can EQ nicely and I can get them to sound good (for my taste). Unfortunately, running them from Apple Music, you're stuck with the crappy Apple EQ presets or a third party EQ that's not integrated very well.

 

[god-bluff]

To Eq = flawed headphones or at least wrongly chosen.

 

[DeepSouth]

Beats differs from Rolex because:
-A $1000 Rolex probably is more accurate than my $30 Casio. Diminishing returns tend not to be bashed on Head fi (e.g. STAX), negative returns are different.
-The vast, vast majority of people buy Rolexs as fashion accessories. There are very few people that are duped into thinking they provide head over heels improvements in timekeeping accuracy compared to much cheaper watches.

I really don't mind people buying Beats for fashion. I don't think most of us care about those people. We generally take issue with the fact that people are buying Beats for sound quality.

Also, we are headphone enthusiasts, not watch enthusiasts.

Watch enthusiasm and audiophilia aren't mutually exclusive
As a watch enthusiast I have to point out that a rolex is several thousand, and since they are mechanical they keep time worse than casio. To be a swiss certified spec chronometer, a watch may not lose more than 4 seconds per day, nor gain more than 6 seconds per day. By the end of a month a Rolex can gain about 3 minutes and still be considered in spec.
People that buy a rolex know they don't keep time as good as a digital watch.

 

[DeepSouth]

I'm not a fan of Beats. They aren't terrible for the money, but they're about as good as bose.
If you have $300 max to spend on a pair of headphones, beats would be on my list to audition.

But I have more than $300 to spend, and beats don't sound very good compared to nicer headphones. Actually I bought a pair of PRYMA for 230 around Xmas. They sound much better than anything at the apple store I've heard.

 

[The Socialist Nerd]

I'm not a fan of Beats. They aren't terrible for the money, but they're about as good as bose.
If you have $300 max to spend on a pair of headphones, beats would be on my list to audition.

But I have more than $300 to spend, and beats don't sound very good compared to nicer headphones. Actually I bought a pair of PRYMA for 230 around Xmas. They sound much better than anything at the apple store I've heard.

Even my Mobius which is a gaming headset sounds better than any Beats headset.

 

[MICHAELSD]

Beats are supposed to be bass-heavy, fashionable headphones. They fill their niche.

 

[Mad Max]

Fashionable?
They look like little kids' toys.
They break more easily than McDonald's Happy Meal toys, too, lol

 

[GearMe]

Fashionable?
They look like little kids' toys.
They break more easily than McDonald's Happy Meal toys, too, lol

God-Bluff...is that you?

 

[god-bluff]

God-Bluff...is that you?

No?!? I'm still here and haven't changed my name again

Great Post though one I would have been proud of. Although I I actually think the build quality of Beats is not good enough to be considered a toy. A toddler would pretty much destroy them instantly.

I think they are ideally suited as a 'my first headphone' for fashionable (edit and impressionable) teens, especially in pink for young laydeez.

 

[The Socialist Nerd]

Beats are supposed to be bass-heavy, fashionable headphones. They fill their niche.

I have to admit that Beats don't seem all that fashionable and honestly they don't seem all that durable to me. I have a leftover pair of Beats ep (blue) headphones somewhere left at my other condo and honestly I never was engaged with them at all except for when I used those at my old job back at CenturyLink. Now that I have upgraded to Audeze LCD-2CB's last week I haven't looked back at those headphones again.

I am going to be attending the University of Utah and right now I often see Beats (and Bose) headphones as one of the two prominent "high-end" headphone manufacturers which are utilized around here by young students recently. If Beats are supposed to be fashionable, I suspect it's the "vibrant" and "less" conservative looks that are purportedly the selling point.

 

[god-bluff]

What really bothers me is sportsman such as England's best current striker, Harry Kane, continue to enjoy huge sponsorship deals with Beats. They have zero individuality or personality. They drive blinged up Range Rovers and Bentley (née VW) Continentals, live in mock Tudor palaces and listen to rap and R&B on der Beats.

Even when they are given headphones like those HD25 addidas editions at the Olympics they would not be seen dead donning any thing but Beats.. sad

.. Rant over, sorry.