How Beats by Dre played you like a fool • Hacker News Board

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#131

Post by keithpeter » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 6:24 PM UTC

kaolinite wrote: post #21

Whilst I dislike Beats, I admire them a lot. They entered a market where every company was focusing on sound quality first, aesthetics second and they came in with a new take: headphones should look good (I actually dislike the style but a lot of young people seem to love it), and should have a lot of bass to make certain types of music - music listened to by young people - sound good (again, I dislike this but many…

The ergonomics seem right for walking about and catching buses/trains/trams. The Beats headphones my students sport include that socket on the headphone end so if the lead gets caught, the plug pulls out.

My huge Beyerdynamic cans would represent a health and safety issue if worn outside the house and the 400 Ohm impedance is not a good match for battery powered devices.

The humble Sennheiser HD201 headphones seem fairly popular for those less well-heeled students upgrading from the supplied ear-buds mind you. Lots of bang for the buck.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#132

Post by keithpeter » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 7:18 PM UTC

72deluxe wrote: post #86

mironathetin wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, but apple computers have a great operating system and they do perform very well. Now read about the comparison of beats with other headphones - or listen yourself - and tell me where the match is? While Apple stuff has become a fashion statement, it also performs. Apple products look good because they are very well designed and made. Beats on the other hand don't perform, at least not sound quality wise. And the…

Oddly though, Beats are nowhere near cheap! For the daft money they throw at headphones with an inline EQ, they could get some great Beyerdynamic headphones that sound brilliant. Fashion over functionality. EDIT: Yep, I missed the point! Functionality = fashion. You can clearly tell I am not fashionable.

Beyerdynamic headphones are chunky, resilient, and you can buy spare parts and effectively replace the whole headset piece by piece. But they are not ergonomic for city walking/metro/bus/train. Lots of trailing bits of metal &c depending on model. And many models are high impedance (200 Ohm/400 Ohm) so less useful for portable devices with limited voltage swing.

So my point is: not just fashion. Suitability for job as well.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#133

Post by cafard » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 8:51 PM UTC

MichaelApproved wrote: post #43

creshal wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> certain types of music - music listened to by young people Can I feel old now? Where's my lawn? > People aren't buying the headphones for the sound quality, they're buying it for everything else. I find this worrying, really. Are we so desperate to consume that we're willing to buy shit just for sake of buying?

> I find this worrying, really. Are we so desperate to consume that we're willing to buy shit just for sake of buying? There's no need to worry, this isn't a sign that society is going downhill. Buying Beats for something other than sound as the primary purpose is no different than buying something purely for fashion sake, which is a centuries old human practice. This comment reminds me of how every generation finds…

Yeah, makes me want to cuddle my Pet Rock till I feel better.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#134

Post by sjwright » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 11:42 PM UTC

s54b32dd wrote: post #114

sjwright wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree. The typical Beats buyer who just want nice looking headphones that sound kickin'. Shame on their competitors for failing to understand their audience. (And personally I wouldn't put much stock in what the audiophiles think. The homoeopathy-grade "facts" and "truths" which pervade much of the audiophile world are in my opinion far more contemptible.)

But, really, most audio companies were never properly positioned to offer the type of product that Beats has anyway. Bose could probably have made the connection, as could a few other broader electronic brands (Sony, Panasonic, etc.), but most brands that are primarily focused on speakers/headphones operate by courting audiophiles, because traditionally that's where the money has been. Certainly, Beats has done an ex…

True, though nothing was stopping any established company from creating a new brand to differentiate markets.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#135

Post by angdis » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 11:57 PM UTC

Brakenshire wrote: post #48

kaolinite wrote: post #21

Whilst I dislike Beats, I admire them a lot. They entered a market where every company was focusing on sound quality first, aesthetics second and they came in with a new take: headphones should look good (I actually dislike the style but a lot of young people seem to love it), and should have a lot of bass to make certain types of music - music listened to by young people - sound good (again, I dislike this but many…

The comparison with Mac seems really spurious. Apple, at its best, redesigns hardware and software to find whole new ways of interacting intuitively with really very complicated computing devices. That is not comparable to making some headphones which are bass heavy. Beats is like Apple, but with its objective value stripped out. i.e. just the fashion and marketing without any of the engineering excellence and innova…

I have to say, however, that the latest Apple earbuds are VERY POOR "one size for all" design, a clear step backwards for a very personal interface.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#136

Post by lwhalen » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 3:17 AM UTC

blowski wrote: post #92

mironathetin wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"And ties - what purpose do they serve other than social signals?" Here is an answer: I am the slave of my company, that's why I wear an expensive, totally useless thing around my neck, that lets me sweat in summer and breathe hard all year round. My company asks that and I do what they say, because I always do what everybody does. And I rather shit my pants than to hold the minority opinion :o)))). Well, you are rig…

Depends on the quality. A $300 silk tie sends a different signal to a $2 tie from a supermarket.

It's still a very expensive, very soft, noose around your neck.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#137

Post by mercer » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 11:53 AM UTC

Brakenshire wrote: post #48

kaolinite wrote: post #21

Whilst I dislike Beats, I admire them a lot. They entered a market where every company was focusing on sound quality first, aesthetics second and they came in with a new take: headphones should look good (I actually dislike the style but a lot of young people seem to love it), and should have a lot of bass to make certain types of music - music listened to by young people - sound good (again, I dislike this but many…

The comparison with Mac seems really spurious. Apple, at its best, redesigns hardware and software to find whole new ways of interacting intuitively with really very complicated computing devices. That is not comparable to making some headphones which are bass heavy. Beats is like Apple, but with its objective value stripped out. i.e. just the fashion and marketing without any of the engineering excellence and innova…

While not the best comparison, there is a bit of truth in it. I consider myself a discerning 'consumer' and I've switched to an Android phone, away from the iPhone, a few years ago. I switched back to iPhone last year. And while the main reasons were functional (better camera, an OS that I prefer), aesthetics and the 'feel' of the iPhone (5S, in my case) definitely played a role. I don't think it's a stretch to say that these factors are even more important to the non-tech crowd. Fashion is important enough to many people that it can be considered part of 'objective value'.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#138

Post by mercer » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 12:02 PM UTC

mironathetin wrote: post #62

lentil_soup wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, Apple is the perfect fit for something like that. They've always taken "boring" hardware and made it a fashion/status statement. They've done this with PCs, phones, music players and now headphones.

Hey, but apple computers have a great operating system and they do perform very well. Now read about the comparison of beats with other headphones - or listen yourself - and tell me where the match is? While Apple stuff has become a fashion statement, it also performs. Apple products look good because they are very well designed and made. Beats on the other hand don't perform, at least not sound quality wise. And the…

Is that really true though? From what I gather Beats are a step up from most headphones non-audiophiles traditionally use, and generally on par with headphones of around 80 bucks. Which is definitely better than kind of earbuds/headphones I and most people tend(ed) to buy who don't really think about this kind of stuff.

I think the comparison with Apple makes sense, looking at it that way. As a 'technophile' I used to pay more for my laptop (Dell, at that point) than most people around me. They would work on really crappy laptops, curse how slow or loud or hot they were, but stick with them and not spend a premium on something better. Apple changed that, and made it 'fashionable' to spend a bit more to get, at the very least, a mid-range laptop. Those who did get one understood the benefits after the fact. Beats are similar. They might not be 'great' to audiophiles, or worth their money, relatively, but for many people they are the first experience of, at least, decent sound.

Re: How Beats by Dre played you like a fool

#139

Post by mercer » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 12:11 PM UTC

bane wrote: post #82

icebraining wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I'm the kind of person who buys expensive stuff to signal my membership, then buying Beats headphones is being myself, no?

No, by definition, group identity replaces and/or subsumes personal identity.

It does, but it's not crazy to say that personal identity barely exists outside of group identity. Sure, some groups are less defining than others, but from what I gather the general consensus is that there is no such thing as 'personal identity' that doesn't also overlap with group identity. We're social creatures.

Of course, some people might have a more defined personal identity than others, but those are outliers. The vast majority of humans define their self based on groups that are important to them (with parents/family usually being dominant, followed by friends and culture).

Basically, I'd argue there is not much self left if you take away the different group identities.