+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats (/showthread.php?tid=167028)
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - vision63 - 05-09-2014
DeusxMac wrote:
(Posted this elsewhere before I saw this thread.)
I wonder about the outcome of a non-Apple branded product being integrated into the "Mac" "i-whathaveyou" product lineup.
Will it remain "Beats" or will it get renamed somehow: "Beats by Apple" "iBeats" "iSounds" etc.?
Has Apple ever purchased an outside retail hardware product manufacturer and kept the products original name/brand?
Since it's "just" headphones, in order for it to be successful, it has to have "something" to do with Dre.
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - freeradical - 05-09-2014
These are only $49, and are perfect for an mp3 player.
http://www.needledoctor.com/Grado-iGrado-Headphones-in-Black?sc=2&category=813
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - N-OS X-tasy! - 05-09-2014
DeusxMac wrote:
Will it remain "Beats" or will it get renamed somehow: "Beats by Apple" "iBeats" "iSounds" etc.?
Assuming Apple decides to continue selling the headphones (a fairly safe assumption considering how much revenue they generate), they certainly will not rename the product -- the brand is simply too valuable.
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - Lew Zealand - 05-09-2014
deckeda wrote:
[quote=ka jowct]
[quote=Lew Zealand]
[quote=jdc]
Is it bad (or wrong?) that I only associate beats with thugs and hoodlums?
Yes. You should in fact associate it with poor quality audio reproduction.
My impression of those headphones is that they are not designed for natural, accurate sound. Right or wrong?
Right.
They are status symbols, but not just of fashion, but false symbols of good sound.
That said, I'm a subjectivist when it comes to music and music reproduction; there are no "facts" that can "prove" a certain technology for example, "must" sound better. It's for that belief that notions of A-B or A-B-X sound tests aren't just irrelevant scientifically, but are far worse: they "prove" whatever the test is set up to do (which is usually something other than what any conclusions drawn reveal.)
So if/when a listener prefers Beats headphones it doesn't "make them wrong" in my view ... but I reserve the right to question what experience they have with such things as live, un-amplified music or music that's not heavily dependent on processed special effects.
I agree. The Beats 'phones may help people to realize that there is better sound reproduction to be had then the crud earbuds which come with every portable device. Beats deliver more bass which a lot of people like.
Hell, I like that but they do not do a good job of delivering the rest of the sound spectrum well and in fact, that extra bass is not well controlled. But frankly, how many people really care? More bass = good.
There are review sites which compare Beats to other popular brands and higher-rent cans which are purposefully designed to deliver better sound reproduction and the beats and other popular brands are found wanting. And my well-reviewed, affordable, "better sound" cans don't do great in some metrics in those tests either (though considerably better than the consumer-level stuff). If I can find the review, I'll post a link to it here, it was very informative.
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - vision63 - 05-09-2014
Anybody that would describe headphones as "cans" is not the customer. It would be the other 97% of the universe that couldn't care less about pursuing the miniscule improvement necessary to achieve sonic perfection.
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - DRR - 05-09-2014
Apple didn't buy Beats for the headphones. As others have stated it's cheap crap.
Google didn't buy Motorola for the phones they made. They bought the to acquire patents.
This is what Apple was after: http://www.beatsmusic.com/
Both a strategic and pre-emptive move.
I hate beets! - RAMd®d - 05-09-2014
Hated 'em as kid, still don't like 'em.
Oh, we're hatin' on something else. Cool.
As long as there have been level controls there have been people whose first act is to turn up the bass. Some people just like bass heavy sound. Nothing wrong with that, at least, if they'd just keep it to themselves. And beats accomplish that. Whether or not they have or will ever appreciate balanced sound and all the subtitles of detailed high-end music is a different question. And certainly their choice.
And there's still plenty of room in the audio landscape for mp3s even if they lack the quality of flac and the snob appeal of any other lossless audio file. "mp" may as well stand for mobile-portable. And esoteric files, high-end players, and audiophile-approved headgear just don't fit that bill, not on any kind of large scale.
We can certainly mock all the stupid people who don't pay $400 for headphones, listen only to lossless music, and use a appropriately high-end external DAC with their portable player. "Quality" headphones for people who use them with say… iPhones and Droids are idiots and suckers. AM I RIGHT??
But if everybody was elite, where would that leave US? Who would we mock and insult?
Still, I am a little disappointed, so far in Apple's purchase, and find it hard to believe that Apple is in it for the headphone revenue. Even though many consumers have elected to make iPhones a fashion statement, I can't see Cook jumping on that band wagon. "Beats headphones! Kids love 'em! We gotta get us some of that! THIS is why we keep a phat war chest!!" I don't know they're the "garbage" that some claim, but they aren't on par with the designed philosophy of Apple.
I wonder what the terms of the deal are. Even if Apple improved the sound and redesigned the look, as mentioned, without the Dre cachét, they'd likely loose a big share of the youth market. Beats by Stephan Hawking? I don't think so.
So that leaves the music service, assuming Apple doesn't have some amazing symbiosis planned for the 'Phones and headphones.
Beats is just about the Benjamins. I hope Apple's latest purchase isn't.
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - deckeda - 05-09-2014
It's not about being "elite" or pursuing the nth degree of sonics. It's about paying LESS for other headphones and getting demonstrably better sound.
Seriously, in all of audio there aren't always clear winners and losers. Beats is consistently not reviewed well, by people that listen critically for a living.
Ah, there I go again, placing the professional above the amateur. Shameful behavior. And it's true we adults do NOT like being told what to like and inherently resist education and experience that might change opinion. That stubbornness to enjoy what we like for whatever reasons we do is often seen as a positive trait. And until we hear better, it'll remain ever so.
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - N-OS X-tasy! - 05-09-2014
Lew Zealand wrote:
[quote=deckeda]
[quote=ka jowct]
[quote=Lew Zealand]
[quote=jdc]
Is it bad (or wrong?) that I only associate beats with thugs and hoodlums?
Yes. You should in fact associate it with poor quality audio reproduction.
My impression of those headphones is that they are not designed for natural, accurate sound. Right or wrong?
Right.
They are status symbols, but not just of fashion, but false symbols of good sound.
That said, I'm a subjectivist when it comes to music and music reproduction; there are no "facts" that can "prove" a certain technology for example, "must" sound better. It's for that belief that notions of A-B or A-B-X sound tests aren't just irrelevant scientifically, but are far worse: they "prove" whatever the test is set up to do (which is usually something other than what any conclusions drawn reveal.)
So if/when a listener prefers Beats headphones it doesn't "make them wrong" in my view ... but I reserve the right to question what experience they have with such things as live, un-amplified music or music that's not heavily dependent on processed special effects.
I agree. The Beats 'phones may help people to realize that there is better sound reproduction to be had then the crud earbuds which come with every portable device. Beats deliver more bass which a lot of people like.
Hell, I like that but they do not do a good job of delivering the rest of the sound spectrum well and in fact, that extra bass is not well controlled. But frankly, how many people really care? More bass = good.
There are review sites which compare Beats to other popular brands and higher-rent cans which are purposefully designed to deliver better sound reproduction and the beats and other popular brands are found wanting. And my well-reviewed, affordable, "better sound" cans don't do great in some metrics in those tests either (though considerably better than the consumer-level stuff). If I can find the review, I'll post a link to it here, it was very informative.
There must be an understanding of the difference between the meaning of the terms "better sound reproduction" and "accurate sound reproduction." They are not necessarily the same thing, but they are being used interchangably in this discussion.
Re: Reports: Apple set to acquire headphone maker Beats - N-OS X-tasy! - 05-09-2014
DRR wrote:
Apple didn't buy Beats for the headphones. As others have stated it's cheap crap.
This is what Apple was after: http://www.beatsmusic.com/
Whether or not this is true, there is a LOT of money to be made by Apple by selling beats headphones. Just sayin'.
If in fact Apple only wanted the streaming music portion, I assume they could have easily purchased only that. Considering how much money beats makes from selling headphones, it doesn't make any sense that the former owners of the company would sell the headphone portion of the business and forgo that revenue stream if Apple didn't want the headphones.
Bottom line: Apple wanted the whole ball of wax, for whatever reason.