Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Looks by Dr. Dre

subtraction.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 123 posts

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#51

Post by brickmort »

moheeb wrote: post #41
paulgerhardt wrote: post #39

As nerd-ragey as some people are about the Beats deal, they have some amazing fit and finish with regards to manufacturing. See for instance their paint: most painted plastics experience an undesirable amount of "orange peeling" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_peel_(effect) ). This is caused in part by not getting the temperature of the paint high enough to form a smooth finish. Metal can withstand significantl…

" Next time you roll into a Best Buy, compare the 'shinyness' and 'smoothness' of Beats to any other product " Yeah...just don't compare the sound.

Audiophiles almost unanimously agree that Beats headphones are sub-par when it comes to overall quality of sound.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#52

Post by moheeb »

coldtea wrote: post #24
nrzuk wrote: post #17

This article lost me at the part suggesting that Dre Beats are premium headphones. Having listened to a few different sets of these "cool" headphones I can personally think they are overpriced crap, don't think they are worth more than £20-30 tops simply based on audio quality. People are simply buying them as a fashion item!

> This article lost me at the part suggesting that Dre Beats are premium headphones. Premium is about price, as in "paid a premium". Dictionary.com definition #11: "of higher price or cost". It also has the meaning of higher quality, but mostly associated with the price and exclusivity (or perceived exclusivity. Premium products, like shoes and clothing, can also be had by millions of people -- it's just that not eve…

You are mixing up the definitions of "premium"; it doesn't have to be about price.

People often pay a premium for something that is not worth the extra money...that is the definition of Beats headphones.

The other definition of premium is analogous to high end. That is the opposite of Beats headphones.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#53

Post by Crito »

jrlocke wrote: post #44
InclinedPlane wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My theory on confusion over the Beats purchase is that Apple fanboys have a reluctance to admit that Apple is significantly a fashion company. Not the beacon of technical excellence(asterisk) they set it up to be in their mind. The reality is that Beats is also primarily a fashion company. Also with a strong brand. Also with a product line that sells at a high markup. They go together like pancakes and maple syrup. I…

Apple's original success does not stem from fashion, but rather from their OS being the most accessible alternative to Windows for non-technical users--driving huge profits selling hardware.

Early iPods did not have a significant leg up over other MP3 players in terms of usability, other MP3 players at the time hearkened back to the Walkman, which nearly all non-technical consumers were perfectly comfortable with and capable of using.

The big gain there was that the iPod had a modern design, not a design dating back to the 80s.

Edit: The clickwheel was an improvement, but it wasn't like consumers were confused or apprehensive about using the alternatives at the time. We were not like the proverbial grandmothers struggling to check their email in Windows XP; they understood the other products just fine.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#54

Post by bcohen5055 »

Crito wrote: post #45
moheeb wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Next time you roll into a Best Buy, compare the 'shinyness' and 'smoothness' of Beats to any other product " Yeah...just don't compare the sound.

The sound on Beats is actually good; much better than what most people have with their headphones so most users will experience an improvement by switching to them. The problem is that the cost:sound ratio is poor; you can find cheaper headphones with the same quality and you can find much better headphones for the same price.

Sound is a very objective measurement so I won't go ahead and say that beats sounds "better" or "worse". However (I can't seem to find the link now) on many audiophile forums Beats have been measured to skew to better frequency response in the low range. Therefore they will sound more thumpy but without warm mids and crisp highs. Beats has engineered their headphones this way for a specific marketing demographic, I just don't know if this is what the majority of Apple customers want and interpret as good performance.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#56

Post by post_break »

brickmort wrote: post #51
moheeb wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Next time you roll into a Best Buy, compare the 'shinyness' and 'smoothness' of Beats to any other product " Yeah...just don't compare the sound.

Audiophiles almost unanimously agree that Beats headphones are sub-par when it comes to overall quality of sound.

But that's not their target demographic so it's moot.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#57

Post by sscalia »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #34
tptacek wrote: post #2

The more closely you look at Beats, the more they make sense as a serious asset to a consumer electronics company, and the less plausible the "Apple just needed to get a streaming service off the ground" story is. Two more angles to consider: * Owning Beats puts Apple hardware on the heads of a huge fraction of every mobile user, whether they use iOS or not. Having a Beats brand affinity for those users makes it easi…

My theory on confusion over the Beats purchase is that Apple fanboys have a reluctance to admit that Apple is significantly a fashion company. Not the beacon of technical excellence(asterisk) they set it up to be in their mind. The reality is that Beats is also primarily a fashion company. Also with a strong brand. Also with a product line that sells at a high markup. They go together like pancakes and maple syrup. I…

You're a smug asshole, aren't you. The reason they are so successful is the technology falls by the wayside; that's how advanced they are. Just because you get off rooting your phone doesn't mean they're not the leaders in technical excellence.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#58

Post by Crito »

bcohen5055 wrote: post #54
Crito wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sound on Beats is actually good; much better than what most people have with their headphones so most users will experience an improvement by switching to them. The problem is that the cost:sound ratio is poor; you can find cheaper headphones with the same quality and you can find much better headphones for the same price.

Sound is a very objective measurement so I won't go ahead and say that beats sounds "better" or "worse". However (I can't seem to find the link now) on many audiophile forums Beats have been measured to skew to better frequency response in the low range. Therefore they will sound more thumpy but without warm mids and crisp highs. Beats has engineered their headphones this way for a specific marketing demographic, I j…

That may be the case, but consider that most consumers are probably currently using the I'll continue to recommend sennheiser over Beats, but I think the primary objection to beats should be their cost, not their quality.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#59

Post by bsenftner »

tptacek wrote: post #2

The more closely you look at Beats, the more they make sense as a serious asset to a consumer electronics company, and the less plausible the "Apple just needed to get a streaming service off the ground" story is. Two more angles to consider: * Owning Beats puts Apple hardware on the heads of a huge fraction of every mobile user, whether they use iOS or not. Having a Beats brand affinity for those users makes it easi…

Owning Beats aligns Apple with hip hop and club culture, perhaps the largest driver of global consumer entertainment outside of film/tv.

Re: Looks by Dr. Dre

#60

Post by InclinedPlane »

jaegerpicker wrote: post #47
InclinedPlane wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My theory on confusion over the Beats purchase is that Apple fanboys have a reluctance to admit that Apple is significantly a fashion company. Not the beacon of technical excellence(asterisk) they set it up to be in their mind. The reality is that Beats is also primarily a fashion company. Also with a strong brand. Also with a product line that sells at a high markup. They go together like pancakes and maple syrup. I…

"have a reluctance to admit that Apple is significantly a fashion company. Not the beacon of technical excellence they set it up to be in their mind." This is a false dichotomy, the idea that Apple is either a fashion company or a Tech leader. Why can't they be both? Yes they make products that are fashionably designed but, IMO, they are clearly also a leader if not the leader in consumer technical excellence.

I think you're misreading what I'm saying. I'm not saying that Apple is just a fashion company. I'm saying that a lot of folks, especially the silicon valley alpha geek types, who are die hard Apple fans try to rationalize their preferences in a way that excludes the fashion aspect out of a sense of embarrassment or what-have-you.
Post reply on HN