Why the Beats Hate?
Dec 6, 2013 at 7:02 PM Post #436 of 2,030

vantt1

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Posts
4,848
Likes
630
For anyone out there who knows what I posted, I sincerely apologise if it had caused any offence. It was silly of me to think it would be alright to do such a thing, and it won't happen again. I'll stick to quarrelsome argument without it.
 
For those who don't know what I posted, I cannot mention the nature of it here.
 
Dec 7, 2013 at 3:39 AM Post #437 of 2,030

thatBeatsguy

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 24, 2013
Posts
3,609
Likes
1,151
  For anyone out there who knows what I posted, I sincerely apologise if it had caused any offence. It was silly of me to think it would be alright to do such a thing, and it won't happen again. I'll stick to quarrelsome argument without it.
 
For those who don't know what I posted, I cannot mention the nature of it here.

  Simply saying that "because they suck" would be immature.

Are you talking about this, perhaps? If so, then I don't see why it would be that offensive...it's kinda true, honestly. We all must face the bitter, brutal truth.
 
Dec 7, 2013 at 7:01 AM Post #438 of 2,030

vantt1

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Posts
4,848
Likes
630
No, it wasn't that. The post was deleted by an admin.
 
Dec 11, 2013 at 6:52 PM Post #439 of 2,030

WitHuntybee

New Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 11, 2013
Posts
13
Likes
11
Beats are just not good headphones when you can get better for $20(Monoprice 8323s hmm). And when people say they want bass, they can get much better sounding bass for way cheaper. The bass in any beats are very muddy. You're paying for the name pretty much.
 
Dec 11, 2013 at 8:20 PM Post #441 of 2,030

alucard177

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Posts
379
Likes
693
  Believe it or not, Beats improved a lot with the new studios. I was a bit impressed with their improvement.

 
I haven't heard the new beats but I do believe you. I still think they are overpriced and you can get really good bass centric headphones for less money. I had a pair of the old solo hd and it was a bit muddy, with the treble boost eq on the iPhone they sounded better and the build quality was good but they are not worth the $199 
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 5:50 AM Post #442 of 2,030

vantt1

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Posts
4,848
Likes
630
Well, being 'worth' $199 would be subjective. It depends whether you value sound quality or fashionability more.
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM Post #443 of 2,030

j14mp

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Posts
81
Likes
14
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. 


I can tell haha. You're $30 Casio is much more accurate than any Rolex! And fashion is for fossil! Not Rolex. My point is, there is an extreme correlation between high end audio and fine time pieces. Engineering, passion and craftsmanship!

Beats are for fashion.. They don't fit the Rolex, Audemars, IWC etc model.

sorry guys, had to clear that up! Lol
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 4:19 PM Post #444 of 2,030

sikwidit

New Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Posts
8
Likes
10
Beats are just not good headphones when you can get better for $20(Monoprice 8323s hmm). And when people say they want bass, they can get much better sounding bass for way cheaper. The bass in any beats are very muddy. You're paying for the name pretty much.


Would you be able to name a few of the bass heavy headphones you speak of.

I am looking for some for the gym and am currently interested in the Sony xb400 but want to find out if they can be taken apart or not. However I would be interested in any cheap bass heavy headphones if you could name some. Thanks
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 6:03 PM Post #446 of 2,030

Minarets

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Posts
614
Likes
56
I too fell for the "beats are garbage" train until I tried the new studios. I don't care for the executives or pros or any other beats. I do think the mixr aren't bad, but not my cup of tea.

The studios are pretty great, imo and I'm not afraid to say it. They aren't perfect by any means, but they do a lot well. Comfort (for me an underrated portion of quality headphones). They feel great. Light weight and not nearly as fragile as before. Bass is tuned way down compared to previous models and its right where I like bass. Treble is very good and mids too. Its only weakness for me is the ANC. I will say though, the white noise that is noticeable isn't as noticeable when music is on. I really do like their sound and would be a happy owner if I had them. I think, though they would be suited better in the $200 market and not $300. I would buy a pair for $200 in a heartbeat.
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 8:45 PM Post #447 of 2,030

MineTwine45

New Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Posts
20
Likes
10
Beats... Heh... See too many of those things. When I first heard the Studios and Solos, they just were absolutely terrible. I loved the way the XB500s sounded over the Beats, so I got the 500s instead.
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 9:59 PM Post #448 of 2,030

vantt1

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Posts
4,848
Likes
630
I can tell haha. You're $30 Casio is much more accurate than any Rolex! And fashion is for fossil! Not Rolex. My point is, there is an extreme correlation between high end audio and fine time pieces. Engineering, passion and craftsmanship!

Beats are for fashion.. They don't fit the Rolex, Audemars, IWC etc model.

sorry guys, had to clear that up! Lol

 
You have no idea how inaccurate watches with automatic movements are. They have to be like accurate within 5 minutes a day to be called a chronograph or something. A $30 Casio's quartz movement will beat a Rolex any time of  the day (except for when there is a strong EMP).
 
Would you be able to name a few of the bass heavy headphones you speak of.

I am looking for some for the gym and am currently interested in the Sony xb400 but want to find out if they can be taken apart or not. However I would be interested in any cheap bass heavy headphones if you could name some. Thanks

 
Care to share why you want to take it apart? Any headphone can be taken apart. It depends on whether you have the skill to.
 
I too fell for the "beats are garbage" train until I tried the new studios. I don't care for the executives or pros or any other beats. I do think the mixr aren't bad, but not my cup of tea.

The studios are pretty great, imo and I'm not afraid to say it. They aren't perfect by any means, but they do a lot well. Comfort (for me an underrated portion of quality headphones). They feel great. Light weight and not nearly as fragile as before. Bass is tuned way down compared to previous models and its right where I like bass. Treble is very good and mids too. Its only weakness for me is the ANC. I will say though, the white noise that is noticeable isn't as noticeable when music is on. I really do like their sound and would be a happy owner if I had them. I think, though they would be suited better in the $200 market and not $300. I would buy a pair for $200 in a heartbeat.

 
The old Studios now sell for $199 here in Australia. They used to be $499 about 2 years ago, and then dropped to $399 before the new ones came out. $199 is a good price, considering the Australian market.
 
  Beats... Heh... See too many of those things. When I first heard the Studios and Solos, they just were absolutely terrible. I loved the way the XB500s sounded over the Beats, so I got the 500s instead.

 
Strange, I found the XB500s to have heavier bass than the Studios. Not the Solos, though. I'd say the XB500s have tighter but heavier bass, whereas the Beats are just muddy.
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 10:11 PM Post #449 of 2,030

MineTwine45

New Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Posts
20
Likes
10
 
Strange, I found the XB500s to have heavier bass than the Studios. Not the Solos, though. I'd say the XB500s have tighter but heavier bass, whereas the Beats are just muddy.

 
The 500s did have more bass, but I thought the sound quality was much clearer and less muddy, as you stated.
 
Dec 12, 2013 at 10:50 PM Post #450 of 2,030

sikwidit

New Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Posts
8
Likes
10
   
 
 
 
Care to share why you want to take it apart? Any headphone can be taken apart. It depends on whether you have the skill to.
 
 

Certainly, I plan to take them apart and modify them so that they will have a detachable cord coming out of one side, assuming there is enough room inside to do so of course. These will be primarily for gym use so that will make them more convenient. Also just in case one side stops working for some reason I can easily replace the cables. The only reason I want to make sure they are even able to be opened is because from the pics I have seen and what I have read about them, the actual earpads dont seem to be able to come off, rather they seem to be fixed to the headphone in some way(glue, stitching, etc). This makes me assume they are opened from the back or somehow at the seam of the plastic coming together, I have just not seen anything about anyone owning these headphones and opening them. Thats why I was just wondering if anyone who has the Sony xb400s has ever taken them apart and gotten to the speaker pcb.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top