Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by smnscu 3341 days ago
I don't doubt the ergonomics are amazing, but it's somewhat surprising to me that people are happy with such mediocre audio performance.
14 comments

Audio quality on them is average, not bad, but their strengths balance out those weaknesses. In particular, I find myself using headphones more often now because I always keep these in my pocket. I listen to a lot of audiobooks and podcasts with them.

Apple AirPods are the real deal. Best new Apple product in years.

Agreed. They're basically always with me, no wires to annoy me, and sound a bit better than the standard EarPods. Sure you can get better sound out of other things, but the fact I always have them is a huge deal.

The best camera is the one you have on you right? Same thing.

Whenever I leave the house, I have a set of Airpods velcroed to the back of my phone case.
Totally agree. There's a lot wrong with them[1], but the audio is good enough and overall I find myself using them way more often than the EarPods so there's some proof in the pudding.

[1] - BT just isn't great tech and there's odd interference/cutout, often around cars; open-case-near-phone-for-battery-level is clunky and inefficient; double-tap to play/pause (voice control for audio control is just non-sensical to me) often doesn't work if it's been more than a few minutes, and seems to prefer opening the Apple Music app which I never use

I'm sad that Beats was the one headphone brand that Apple ended up purchasing when they wanted to expand that space. B&O felt like a natural synergy for them too.

I would love to be able to buy better-sounding AirPods under an Apple/B&O label.

Apple didn't buy a headphone maker for expertise at making headphones that sound good. Apple Stores sell headphones from any number of brands—including B&O—so there's nothing to gain by making their own headphones more audiophile-friendly. They still make money off of other companies' audiophile-targeted headphones, without having to actually design and produce any.

Instead, Apple bought the headphone maker whose products make money through a combination of visually-distinct brand-recognition and a high level of "fit and finish"—the same way their own hardware does. Beats slots into Apple's product-design paradigm as naturally as if they had created the brand themselves.

There's a pretty good argument they bought Beats for the music service (and it's people and relationships), which they turned into/merged with Apple music. They seem to have left the headphone business alone (other than giving one kind of Beats have the same chipset that the AirPods have).
> They seem to have left the headphone business alone

Well, why wouldn't they? Going by my argument, it was already being done "the way they would have done it."

It's like moving in with someone who already has the same cleaning habits that you do: you can just leave them alone and trust them to do the right thing, and then be happy with the results.

Apple has never really bought something and left it alone before. While the Beats headphone brand was good, some people wondered if they would change it somehow. "Beats presented by Apple" or something like that. Start putting their logo on the product, etc.

I'm not saying it would be a smart idea. I think Apple did the right thing. But Apple couple years ago may well have made a change like that.

Thisx1000. B&O, B&W, Sonus Faber, PSB... I'd run out and buy any of them with a W1 Bluetooth chip in a heartbeat.
I really do wonder if Apple will license it to anyone. For example, I'd be quite happy to get Bose noise canceling headphones with a W1 in it.

It's obvious why Beats gets it, the question is whether anyone else will.

100's of millions of people use Apple's wired earbuds. These sound somewhat better. Not surprising that for most uses of mobile audio, they are better than good enough.
Hundreds of millions of people use the free headphones that come with their devices. The people who spend $200 on headphones usually have some higher requirements for audio quality.
I don't think so. Beats has about 70%+ share of the headphone market, cost over $200, and are hated by people that care about 'sound quality'.
Headphone snobs look down their nose at beats, and for good reason - they are way overpriced for their actual sound quality - but that doesn't mean they aren't good headphones.

The problem is that Beats is charging $300 for a $150 set of headphones, not that beats is charging $300 for a $15 set of headphones. They're way better than anything you're going to get for free with your phone.

> They're way better than anything you're going to get for free with your phone.

I'm not sure I can, in good faith, agree with this. The bass is blown way out of proportion to the rest of the track, the highs powered up to compensate for the bass, and the mids are lost in the power struggle. And this is in Beats' flagship "Solo" line.

That description of the sound? It applies to pretty much every default set of headphones out there.

They're hardly unusable, but I would have a hard time justifying paying $15 for them. Then again, I wear Kirkland jeans and conference swag t-shirts, as a measure of my "fashion" factor.

Sincerely, a snob.

The ergonomics of the AirPods are definitely worth a lot to many people. When used in conjunction with the Apple Watch, you never have to reach for your iPhone for audio. It works great and the sound is adequate when I'm exercising or doing some other outdoor activity. The AirPods are not audiophile quality but they are not horrible either.
I'm one of the very happy ones, and I listen mostly to podcasts in fairly noisy environments.

Audio quality simply doesn't matter that much to me. Really small/no cords/relatively minimal bluetooth nonsense is amazing.

Most of the things that people use their headphones to listen to these days are streamed, which means they're using the lowest bit-rate they can get away with, to save on data. Paying more for better audio would be pure waste for most people.
I actually prefer to use mediocre sounding headphones in public. The cramped frequency response lets me clearly distinguish the sound of the music I'm listening to from the sounds of the environment around me. I bought a pair of high end Sennheiser ear buds a few years ago that I could never get comfortable using in public. They were just too disorienting. I always had that feeling of someone standing behind me calling my name. I have a high end pair of bookshelf speakers at home that causes the same sort of effect on my cats. They get all nervous and freaked out by certain types of music especially if it uses a lot of panning stereo effects. They're totally oblivious to lower quality speakers.
>I always had that feeling of someone standing behind me calling my name.

Sounds like a psychological issue, not a technological one.

Probably a fun combination of both!
I am too, but most people probably listen to these class of headphones for ages, so they're not even aware/in need of something better. The fact is, the AirPods are like a $25 headphone packed into a $150 wireless case.
I lose my headphones often enough that I balk at anything about $15. I'd probably be quite happy with the Airpods' quality...

... right until I dropped one onto the subway tracks.

> balk at anything about $15.

Check out the Sennheiser HD 202! they're around 30 bucks last time I checked and great fidelity and durability for the price.

edit: ok ok sorry you're right, $15 > $30 "heck, it's even twice as much!" i guess my point is that there are things that won't break the bank that sound way better than you'd expect, that's all. :)

edit2: Oh, and i _ALSO_ frequently break or lose mine, that's why I don't like spending more than the 30 bucks. ;)

"I balk at anything above $15"

"You should buy this $30 pair!"

:)

I actually own a pair of Sennheiser HD 280's for when I'm at a desk, but they're not really appropriate for a commute; for that, I just have a cheap pair of JVC earbuds with a microphone/button.

I specifically buy them cheap because my hearing's not awesome anyway, and I don't really need excellent sound quality for listening to a podcast on the train, and I tend to wash a pair with the laundry or dip them into my coffee a few times a year, anyway.

edit: yep, you're right - but there are places where I need quality, and places where I need quantity :P

How about $5? VE Monks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZbCWaY2KXo

I have a $400 pair of headphones, but I like these earbuds as well.

Wow, that's mind blowing. Great channel as well, thanks for the share!
Always take things with headphone/earphone reviewing with a grain of salt. You may not like the same things the reviewer does. There may be differences in music, biological differences in age, or different circumstances of use.

Also note that headphones/earphones are one item that are particularly resistant to effective A/B testing. It's hard to put on a different set and not know you've put on a particular set.

No joke. The fact neither the the old Apple headphones nor the airpods will stay in my ears while running makes both sets no more than a hardly usable alternative to actual earbuds, at least to me.
You can search Amazon for these soft latex things which help keep Airpods in place.
Vojo rabbits. Or something similar. They really help keep the newer Apple headphones in.
I use them primarily for voice chat. I have two sets, since they only last two hours in voice mode - they go from zero to full-charge in 30 minutes, so I can hot-swap if I'm on a long call.

For music quality, I use Sennheiser Momentum Wireless 2. But for VoIP and podcasts, I usually grab the Airpods.

very few people care about audio performance. the "passable" bar is really low
it's somewhat surprising to me that people are happy with such mediocre audio performance.

Especially since you can buy a set of wired earpods that actually sound really good for $5.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZbCWaY2KXo

I bought a pair for myself and my girlfriend. I think they sound better than my Grados on certain material, and almost as good as my Portapros. (I suspect my pair of Grados SR60e is below average, because my dad's pair of the same model sounds better.)

Another pair of headphones that punches way above its price point: http://a.co/cRC61XE (Though, be prepared to eventually replace the plug or buy a new pair, but it will be awhile before that happens.)

Apple needs to step up its audio game.

Do they? People seem to think these are good enough (and I agree, they sound quite nice). Plus they have additional constraints on them because they're using Bluetooth. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple added a proprietary protocol to fix Bluetooth issues in the future version, but for now it's Bluetooth. Wired headphones don't have that same issue.

Either way they're back ordered six weeks. Even if Apple were to improve the sound quality my guess is they couldn't produce them any faster so why bother?

Even if Apple were to improve the sound quality my guess is they couldn't produce them any faster so why bother?

Because cachet is a vital part of Apple's marketing strategy. If they could capture some of that kind of attention for doing something respectable, they would benefit.

Plus they have additional constraints on them because they're using Bluetooth.

That is significant. However, Bluetooth is improving. Other forms of technology are improving as well. We're getting to the point where very linear drivers combined with digital processing are starting to make a difference. Soon, we'll be able to make such devices cheaply, with sensors that are fast enough to make regular consumer devices perform like today's high end headphones.

Apple has traditionally cared about aesthetics enabling technology. Their screens are good, and while not high end with sound, they have sold decent sound hardware in their laptops. They were early with Toslink. Steve Jobs cared about decent sound as well.

For almost all consumers who have never owned super fancy headphones the sound quality is great.
I own super fancy headphones, but they're not "everyday carry" for me like the AirPods are. There's something to be said for the portability and convenience of AirPods. For me, the tradeoff in sound quality is more than worth it.
Audio products are fashion statements.
They must be sheeple, right?
I'm very satisfied could mean "I have the latest apple product and they look good on me".

Source: met a guy at airport who tried to convince me buy a pair. I explained they were not loud enough for the noisy plane environment. Had a long eye-opening discussion about gadgets all the way to the taxi.