As long as Iovine and Dre are involved with this, I don't think the sound quality is going to change. They obviously like the sound quality of artificial bass because their hearing is messed up due to the type of music and the way they engineer the music of what they do. .
Cue certainly did raise the bar tonight. But **** Iovine for ripping Apple's headphones on stage. He said Apple only makes headphones to test that the audio on the phone is working right. A bit rich coming from someone who makes headphones that a lot of people feel are overpriced crap. I hope if he and Dre start to interfere in product design that Ive tells them to **** off.
I just checked out Beats Music just to see what the big deal is all about.
It's God awful. If that's what Cook wanted to spend $3 Billion, then he's going to have to spend another $3 Billion cleaning it up. It's HORRIBLE.
What a complete waste of money.
I'm now waiting for WWDC to see what the response is when they bring these idiots on stage. If there is a negative reaction from the crowd, it's going to be a PR nightmare.
What's wrong with Beats music? The interface is as good or better than spotify. They have the same catalog as every other streaming service. I think their curated lists are just ok, but I suppose they are better than not having them at all.
Getting good headphones for under $1000 is difficult. I'm actually saving up for a pair of HD800's myself, but I know a lot of people are liking the Audezes, Ultrasone Edition 10's, Grado, Stax, Fostex TH900's, and other ultra high end models.
I've been using Beyerdynamic DT770's for studio reference headphones for years now and really like them. Well under $1000. I haven't tried their mobile offerings though (the DT770s are a bit bulky to wear outside of the studio). That's kinda what this is about: headphones you'd use on the go with your iPhone/iPad. I know I certainly wouldn't take a pair of $3000 headphones out of my studio.
I'll respectfully disagree about Apple's headphones. I find them horrible in all honesty. They never stay in my ears for more than 5 seconds before falling out and the sound quality I find to be just above mediocre.
Have you tried the new ones? The old ones hurt my ears after being in my ears any amount of time; I can wear the new ones for hours comfortably and they sound fine.
I'm quite shocked to hear him saying that. You just don't do that. I wonder what relationship Cook and him have. This guy still has to work for Apple and I can't imagine having much positive outcome of this if that guy is so dismissive about what his parent company and employer does.
Actually, that comment was an assault on Jony Ive, not Cook.
The iPhone EarPods may well be made to "see if the sound works", but Beats' headphones are "made to see if the sound can be distorted with excessive bass and treble".
Or, perhaps, the Beats' headphones are "made to see if fools and money are easily parted".
Actually, that comment was an assault on Jony Ive, not Cook.
More an assault on the electroacoustic engineers at Apple who worked on the EarPods. Ive certainly had a hand in them from an aesthetic standpoint, but he's an industrial designer and likely doesn't have much experience in the field of acoustics.
Yeah that was not classy at all. I have my concerns about how the Beats team will fit in culturally at Apple. Of course Cook and Cue are going to say its a marriage made in heaven. Now that we know Apple is taking over Beats hardware design I hope Iovine and Dre stick to the music side of the business and leave the hardware stuff to Apple.
I hope Apple improves on the sound front - the old Apple Hi-Fi speaker did not sound good - they went for volume instead of clear sound, just like Beats goes for heavy bass instead of clear sound.
As much as I like expensive stuff because it's usually quality stuff I would also think that one can get a a very good, high end headphones for under a thousand bucks.
Thanks for the advise, I will indeed check out some extremely expensive headphones somewhere and see what the 'fuss' is about. I was in the market for new in-ear headphones as my 3rd pair from Apple has died on me and I think I should turn to a different brand now. It's just that the store I was in the other day didn't allow me to try a pair on, so I bought some cheapskate no name (UrbanEars) €30 useless thingy. You get what you pay for applies here: the sound isn't anything like the pair from Apple, and the supposedly silicon made plugs do not stay in my ear and feel like plastic. I was able to put the plugs from Apple on them, but the sound really is inferior.
I will also check out this app you mention, and see if there is anything left in my hearing.
Thank you.
Oh yeah, the topic, why Apple bought this company? Beats me.
You buy the same earbuds the PROFESSIONALS use. Check out the plethora of custom molded earbuds. Ultimate Ears has some and they have something like up to 5 or 6 drivers inside. They insane, but they and other brand are used by probably 75% of the top professionals. So you could wear the exact same pair that Justin Bieber or your favorite celebrity uses. LOL... it's all about whatever floats you boat. The custom models kick butt, but they aren't cheap. I think they typically start at bout $1000.
The Apple headphone diss is pretty ironic and also pretty low class, but then again, I can't say that I'm surprised. Apple's headphones are free with certain devices, nobody is expecting Apple's earbuds to sound as good as other headphones that costs hundreds of dollars. Audiophiles who listen to music through their Apple devices are already using other high quality headphones that they own.
Plenty of people think that Beat's headphones are crap, so coming from them, that statement is even more hilarious.
Nobody seems to realize that Iovine was talking in general about earbuds that come with phones - not specifically Apple's earbuds.
I wonder how much the health of a person' shearing comes into play with this whole argument about headphone quality. After all, those who are really into music are likely the same set who attended rock/metal/whatever concerts in their youth and blasted music at high decimals through headphones during that same youth, leaving them with reduced hearing capacity by the time they are old enough to really appreciate sound quality and wealthy enough to consider high-end equipment. I have an easy hearing test that can tell you something (something, not everything) about your hearing capability. Go find yourself a pre-1982 penny and flip in in the air, ensuring it contacts off your fingernail when you flip it. These older pennies, due to the specific alloy they are composed of, will ring (referred to as singing). Most folks older than 40 cannot hear the ringing, but I'm 51 and have no trouble hearing it. You can blind test someone by switching between a newer penny and a pre-1982 penny having them close their eyes and by flipping the pennies in random intervals at one or the other side of their head (whichever side they indicate their hearing is better). Try it, it's quite informative. (Some 1982 pennies also sing but it's best to use a pre-1982 penny as the metal alloy was changed halfway through that mint year.)
Here's one thing I know, there is a chart about listening to loud music for certain durations. Once the music starts hitting over 85dB continuously, it starts to cause more permanent damage. That's why I don't normally listen through earphones. The biggest challenge is trying to figure out what dB you're listening to when listening through earbuds and headphones, which I honestly don't know if anyone has figured that one out. At least, I don't know of any off the top of my head. It's just that if I wear earbuds, I try to turn them down from full volume until i know it's not ear splitting. But when it comes to listening to my stereo, I use a SPL meter on my iPad or iPhone that I have. And you just get a good one and see what levels you listen at so you know. The higher end products can be less fatiguing on your ears since they'll have less distortion in the higher frequencies, so I know that distortion can cause you to have issues, but it's just turning the headphones down to a comfortable volume that's not ear splitting which is hard to do.
I know that ring with the penny you're talking about. I'm sure getting signal generator that you can download for dirt cheap or for free, have it pump through a pair of headphones at a not so damaging volume level and you might be able to figure out what your range of hearing is. I haven't tried that........... OR you can get your ears checked by a, eh um, a professional doctor. :-)
I'm really looking forward to Neil Young's Pono project, set to come out later this year with high-end sound, high-quality portable players, high-resolution music downloads, and its own desktop music software. I hope they can execute all these things.
I'll be curious to see if CarPlay was a factor in any of this.
Exactly my thought too. Beats is pushing into the car, too. So what if Apple (after some negotiation with labels) gets their full iTunes catalogue available to stream - for those who are into the subscription model. Plus enhance iTunes Radio with Beats' praised playlists?
And to think further - what if Iovine is to turn iTunes into a real publishing platform, where artists can sign up (bypassing record labels)?
All speculation. But Apple is not spending 3 billion without big plans. They get a solid brand, can definitely lift sales of the headphones with their retail strength. But the true value lies in Iovine and what he might do with the whole iTunes business. He's smart. Should make for some interesting months to come
I wonder how much the health of a person' shearing comes into play with this whole argument about headphone quality. After all, those who are really into music are likely the same set who attended rock/metal/whatever concerts in their youth and blasted music at high decimals through headphones during that same youth, leaving them with reduced hearing capacity by the time they are old enough to really appreciate sound quality and wealthy enough to consider high-end equipment.
As with any sense (taste, smell, etc), there is a different range of experience for everyone. And, of course, the more you learn and pay attention to details, the more you tend to obsess over them (which is where age becomes a factor). I remember reading an article about an audiophile who paid ~$30k for a power conditioner for his home because he could hear a slight click in his music when his refrigerator turned on. It would be classified as a form of OCD by most, but it's generally what distinguishes people who work with music/sound at a very high professional level from others.
Seems a lot of folks out in the market miss the point that a small company, on its own worth X, in the hands of a huge company, can be worth 10X or more. Apple will multiply the value of Beats Electronics by simply amping up the marketing of those premium-price Beats headphones globally to Apple's enormous installed base of iPhone and iPod owners. Beats, on its own, doesn't have direct access to those folks and Apple would not likely give access to one external peripherals vendor over another. But as an Apple-owned brand, Beats will get top billing among Apple's marketing space. Ka-Ching! Suddenly, Beats is selling $2 billion, then 3, then 4 billion of headphones, portable speakers and in-car audio solutions. Could this be what Tim Cook has in mind when he said the Beats acquisition will be accretive in 2015? Heck, that's pretty soon given that the deal won't close until the end of 2014. I'm inclined to believe Cook when he says the deal will be accretive over someone who is clearly having a knee-jerk reaction based upon a valid, but inconsequential assessment of the headphone acoustic quality.
Well, here's my take.
1. I don't know how much Beats has in terms of CASH.
2. I don't know how much Beats has in terms of Net Profits from the combined efforts.
3. I do know that MOST companies that make a product like Beats headphones are probably running between 10 and 20% Net Profit to Gross Sales is a pretty close spread. Obviously, the margins increase if Apple owns Beats since they sell the products in their own stores because they instantly make more money.
4. I do know that Beats Music was losing money due to lack of paid subscribers. How much they were losing I don't know, but they just dropped the price of the paid service, so they will need to get that much more paid subscribers to break even, at what point they will break even, I do not know and I also don't know if they have factored in this recent price drop or not.
5. Can Beats continue at the growth rate they are at and for how long? I don't know.
6. What the company is worth is only as much as someone is going to pay.
What Tim Cook says and what is reality is anyone's guess because unless Tim Cook is releasing the numbers to run our own what if's, I have a gut feeling he's not telling us everything. If he was honest enough to disclose the facts about Beats, then we could validate, and I can't stand it when they don't disclose everything when there is a large acquisition like this when Beats isn't a publicly traded company. Between Cook and Cue, they seem to be doing a lot of damage control and don't you think it was odd that no one has been confronting them with the burning question of what Apple thought of the video that was posted by Dr. Dre's idiot friend? Dr. Dre has been pretty quiet. Are they going to hide him from being interviewed by the media on this? When people escape the media, it's obvious they are hiding something especially when what they are hiding from is already public. It's just suspicious to me. My trust in Cook is not at an all time high right now for various reasons, so I'm just being skeptical until PROVEN otherwise.
Beats hasn't been in business all that long and I quite honestly don't know how much cash they had, but i don't think they were rolling in it.
If Beats Electronics did $1.4 last year in gross sales, that means they might have made in Net Profits around $140 to $280 Million at most. I highly doubt they made any more than that. Apple, as well run as they are, made about 20% Net Profits, but something tells me Beats isn't as well run as Apple. Now, how much money is Apple going to have to dump into Beats Music to get their s/w redesigned, because just because Apple bought them doesn't mean that I will automatically use it. I do have an iTunes account and I have in the past bought songs from iTunes and I have iTunes Match, but from trying Beats Music, it's an awful app. It looks like Google and Microsoft join forces to hack out a subscription app and this is what happened when they got together with their reject UI designers.. To me, it's that bad. You may think otherwise, but I wouldn't use it. But I can understand why Beats had a problem getting paid subscribers and why Apple dropped the yearly subscription rate.
Either way, most companies get bought at a fairly large multiple of around 10X or more of their earnings. That's typical, unless someone's stupid. HP bought Autonomy and paid considerably more than 10x their earnings and they later found out there was a huge possibility of strange accounting, which I could believe.. So, if it's not a publicly traded company 10x or more is typical. That means, if the company continues at the same Net Profit, it can take 10 years to recoup. I am a little suspicious that they can recoup their money in 1 year. I just highly doubt that unless Apples' factoring in a HUGE increase in Beats Music users or something they aren't telling us.
I like full disclosure on things like this, without, it sounds fishy, that's all.
What's wrong with Beats music? The interface is as good or better than spotify. They have the same catalog as every other streaming service. I think their curated lists are just ok, but I suppose they are better than not having them at all.
Haters gonna hate I suppose.
I didn't dig it. I tried it, I hated it, and i'm not going to use it. I'm not comparing to Spotify, which I also don't use.
I've been using Beyerdynamic DT770's for studio reference headphones for years now and really like them. Well under $1000. I haven't tried their mobile offerings though (the DT770s are a bit bulky to wear outside of the studio). That's kinda what this is about: headphones you'd use on the go with your iPhone/iPad. I know I certainly wouldn't take a pair of $3000 headphones out of my studio.
I understand. I haven't heard or compared the Beyer to the other high end models. But I've run into various high end audio mfg that make super expensive equipment and they do a lot of critical listening to their prototypes on HD800's. All of the people that I know that have heard those say they are the most detailed. but the new Audeze are getting more detailed, but they use planar instead of a typical driver. Beyer has been known to make some decent products, but I just haven't tried any recently.
I did run into a site that has sound recordings of some headphones but I haven't listened to it. Check it out if you are interested. They have the Audeze and other models compared to a few Beyer, but they don't have the HD800's listed. As far as taking outside, I know some people that don't have a problem bringing expensive headphones when traveling. Some people do. So that's a personal choice.
Surprised they aren't rolling Beats Music into iTunes. Yeah the regulatory stuff, but long term there's got to be efficiencies developing one service only.
Wait until the deal is approved. Can't make huge changes until it's signed off on. Until then, its business as usual...
Comments
GOTCHA!!
What's wrong with Beats music? The interface is as good or better than spotify. They have the same catalog as every other streaming service. I think their curated lists are just ok, but I suppose they are better than not having them at all.
Haters gonna hate I suppose.
Getting good headphones for under $1000 is difficult. I'm actually saving up for a pair of HD800's myself, but I know a lot of people are liking the Audezes, Ultrasone Edition 10's, Grado, Stax, Fostex TH900's, and other ultra high end models.
I've been using Beyerdynamic DT770's for studio reference headphones for years now and really like them. Well under $1000. I haven't tried their mobile offerings though (the DT770s are a bit bulky to wear outside of the studio). That's kinda what this is about: headphones you'd use on the go with your iPhone/iPad. I know I certainly wouldn't take a pair of $3000 headphones out of my studio.
I'll respectfully disagree about Apple's headphones. I find them horrible in all honesty. They never stay in my ears for more than 5 seconds before falling out and the sound quality I find to be just above mediocre.
Have you tried the new ones? The old ones hurt my ears after being in my ears any amount of time; I can wear the new ones for hours comfortably and they sound fine.
Actually, that comment was an assault on Jony Ive, not Cook.
The iPhone EarPods may well be made to "see if the sound works", but Beats' headphones are "made to see if the sound can be distorted with excessive bass and treble".
Or, perhaps, the Beats' headphones are "made to see if fools and money are easily parted".
Actually, that comment was an assault on Jony Ive, not Cook.
More an assault on the electroacoustic engineers at Apple who worked on the EarPods. Ive certainly had a hand in them from an aesthetic standpoint, but he's an industrial designer and likely doesn't have much experience in the field of acoustics.
Yeah that was not classy at all. I have my concerns about how the Beats team will fit in culturally at Apple. Of course Cook and Cue are going to say its a marriage made in heaven. Now that we know Apple is taking over Beats hardware design I hope Iovine and Dre stick to the music side of the business and leave the hardware stuff to Apple.
I hope Apple improves on the sound front - the old Apple Hi-Fi speaker did not sound good - they went for volume instead of clear sound, just like Beats goes for heavy bass instead of clear sound.
As much as I like expensive stuff because it's usually quality stuff I would also think that one can get a a very good, high end headphones for under a thousand bucks.
Thanks for the advise, I will indeed check out some extremely expensive headphones somewhere and see what the 'fuss' is about. I was in the market for new in-ear headphones as my 3rd pair from Apple has died on me and I think I should turn to a different brand now. It's just that the store I was in the other day didn't allow me to try a pair on, so I bought some cheapskate no name (UrbanEars) €30 useless thingy. You get what you pay for applies here: the sound isn't anything like the pair from Apple, and the supposedly silicon made plugs do not stay in my ear and feel like plastic. I was able to put the plugs from Apple on them, but the sound really is inferior.
I will also check out this app you mention, and see if there is anything left in my hearing.
Thank you.
Oh yeah, the topic, why Apple bought this company? Beats me.
You buy the same earbuds the PROFESSIONALS use. Check out the plethora of custom molded earbuds. Ultimate Ears has some and they have something like up to 5 or 6 drivers inside. They insane, but they and other brand are used by probably 75% of the top professionals. So you could wear the exact same pair that Justin Bieber or your favorite celebrity uses. LOL... it's all about whatever floats you boat. The custom models kick butt, but they aren't cheap. I think they typically start at bout $1000.
The Apple headphone diss is pretty ironic and also pretty low class, but then again, I can't say that I'm surprised. Apple's headphones are free with certain devices, nobody is expecting Apple's earbuds to sound as good as other headphones that costs hundreds of dollars. Audiophiles who listen to music through their Apple devices are already using other high quality headphones that they own.
Plenty of people think that Beat's headphones are crap, so coming from them, that statement is even more hilarious.
Nobody seems to realize that Iovine was talking in general about earbuds that come with phones - not specifically Apple's earbuds.
Do you have a quote or a link? What I had read seems to directly apply to Apple.
I wonder how much the health of a person' shearing comes into play with this whole argument about headphone quality. After all, those who are really into music are likely the same set who attended rock/metal/whatever concerts in their youth and blasted music at high decimals through headphones during that same youth, leaving them with reduced hearing capacity by the time they are old enough to really appreciate sound quality and wealthy enough to consider high-end equipment. I have an easy hearing test that can tell you something (something, not everything) about your hearing capability. Go find yourself a pre-1982 penny and flip in in the air, ensuring it contacts off your fingernail when you flip it. These older pennies, due to the specific alloy they are composed of, will ring (referred to as singing). Most folks older than 40 cannot hear the ringing, but I'm 51 and have no trouble hearing it. You can blind test someone by switching between a newer penny and a pre-1982 penny having them close their eyes and by flipping the pennies in random intervals at one or the other side of their head (whichever side they indicate their hearing is better). Try it, it's quite informative. (Some 1982 pennies also sing but it's best to use a pre-1982 penny as the metal alloy was changed halfway through that mint year.)
Here's one thing I know, there is a chart about listening to loud music for certain durations. Once the music starts hitting over 85dB continuously, it starts to cause more permanent damage. That's why I don't normally listen through earphones. The biggest challenge is trying to figure out what dB you're listening to when listening through earbuds and headphones, which I honestly don't know if anyone has figured that one out. At least, I don't know of any off the top of my head. It's just that if I wear earbuds, I try to turn them down from full volume until i know it's not ear splitting. But when it comes to listening to my stereo, I use a SPL meter on my iPad or iPhone that I have. And you just get a good one and see what levels you listen at so you know. The higher end products can be less fatiguing on your ears since they'll have less distortion in the higher frequencies, so I know that distortion can cause you to have issues, but it's just turning the headphones down to a comfortable volume that's not ear splitting which is hard to do.
I know that ring with the penny you're talking about. I'm sure getting signal generator that you can download for dirt cheap or for free, have it pump through a pair of headphones at a not so damaging volume level and you might be able to figure out what your range of hearing is. I haven't tried that........... OR you can get your ears checked by a, eh um, a professional doctor. :-)
I'm really looking forward to Neil Young's Pono project, set to come out later this year with high-end sound, high-quality portable players, high-resolution music downloads, and its own desktop music software. I hope they can execute all these things.
I'll be curious to see if CarPlay was a factor in any of this.
Exactly my thought too. Beats is pushing into the car, too. So what if Apple (after some negotiation with labels) gets their full iTunes catalogue available to stream - for those who are into the subscription model. Plus enhance iTunes Radio with Beats' praised playlists?
And to think further - what if Iovine is to turn iTunes into a real publishing platform, where artists can sign up (bypassing record labels)?
All speculation. But Apple is not spending 3 billion without big plans. They get a solid brand, can definitely lift sales of the headphones with their retail strength. But the true value lies in Iovine and what he might do with the whole iTunes business. He's smart. Should make for some interesting months to come
I wonder how much the health of a person' shearing comes into play with this whole argument about headphone quality. After all, those who are really into music are likely the same set who attended rock/metal/whatever concerts in their youth and blasted music at high decimals through headphones during that same youth, leaving them with reduced hearing capacity by the time they are old enough to really appreciate sound quality and wealthy enough to consider high-end equipment.
As with any sense (taste, smell, etc), there is a different range of experience for everyone. And, of course, the more you learn and pay attention to details, the more you tend to obsess over them (which is where age becomes a factor). I remember reading an article about an audiophile who paid ~$30k for a power conditioner for his home because he could hear a slight click in his music when his refrigerator turned on. It would be classified as a form of OCD by most, but it's generally what distinguishes people who work with music/sound at a very high professional level from others.
Seems a lot of folks out in the market miss the point that a small company, on its own worth X, in the hands of a huge company, can be worth 10X or more. Apple will multiply the value of Beats Electronics by simply amping up the marketing of those premium-price Beats headphones globally to Apple's enormous installed base of iPhone and iPod owners. Beats, on its own, doesn't have direct access to those folks and Apple would not likely give access to one external peripherals vendor over another. But as an Apple-owned brand, Beats will get top billing among Apple's marketing space. Ka-Ching! Suddenly, Beats is selling $2 billion, then 3, then 4 billion of headphones, portable speakers and in-car audio solutions. Could this be what Tim Cook has in mind when he said the Beats acquisition will be accretive in 2015? Heck, that's pretty soon given that the deal won't close until the end of 2014. I'm inclined to believe Cook when he says the deal will be accretive over someone who is clearly having a knee-jerk reaction based upon a valid, but inconsequential assessment of the headphone acoustic quality.
Well, here's my take.
1. I don't know how much Beats has in terms of CASH.
2. I don't know how much Beats has in terms of Net Profits from the combined efforts.
3. I do know that MOST companies that make a product like Beats headphones are probably running between 10 and 20% Net Profit to Gross Sales is a pretty close spread. Obviously, the margins increase if Apple owns Beats since they sell the products in their own stores because they instantly make more money.
4. I do know that Beats Music was losing money due to lack of paid subscribers. How much they were losing I don't know, but they just dropped the price of the paid service, so they will need to get that much more paid subscribers to break even, at what point they will break even, I do not know and I also don't know if they have factored in this recent price drop or not.
5. Can Beats continue at the growth rate they are at and for how long? I don't know.
6. What the company is worth is only as much as someone is going to pay.
What Tim Cook says and what is reality is anyone's guess because unless Tim Cook is releasing the numbers to run our own what if's, I have a gut feeling he's not telling us everything. If he was honest enough to disclose the facts about Beats, then we could validate, and I can't stand it when they don't disclose everything when there is a large acquisition like this when Beats isn't a publicly traded company. Between Cook and Cue, they seem to be doing a lot of damage control and don't you think it was odd that no one has been confronting them with the burning question of what Apple thought of the video that was posted by Dr. Dre's idiot friend? Dr. Dre has been pretty quiet. Are they going to hide him from being interviewed by the media on this? When people escape the media, it's obvious they are hiding something especially when what they are hiding from is already public. It's just suspicious to me. My trust in Cook is not at an all time high right now for various reasons, so I'm just being skeptical until PROVEN otherwise.
Beats hasn't been in business all that long and I quite honestly don't know how much cash they had, but i don't think they were rolling in it.
If Beats Electronics did $1.4 last year in gross sales, that means they might have made in Net Profits around $140 to $280 Million at most. I highly doubt they made any more than that. Apple, as well run as they are, made about 20% Net Profits, but something tells me Beats isn't as well run as Apple. Now, how much money is Apple going to have to dump into Beats Music to get their s/w redesigned, because just because Apple bought them doesn't mean that I will automatically use it. I do have an iTunes account and I have in the past bought songs from iTunes and I have iTunes Match, but from trying Beats Music, it's an awful app. It looks like Google and Microsoft join forces to hack out a subscription app and this is what happened when they got together with their reject UI designers.. To me, it's that bad. You may think otherwise, but I wouldn't use it. But I can understand why Beats had a problem getting paid subscribers and why Apple dropped the yearly subscription rate.
Either way, most companies get bought at a fairly large multiple of around 10X or more of their earnings. That's typical, unless someone's stupid. HP bought Autonomy and paid considerably more than 10x their earnings and they later found out there was a huge possibility of strange accounting, which I could believe.. So, if it's not a publicly traded company 10x or more is typical. That means, if the company continues at the same Net Profit, it can take 10 years to recoup. I am a little suspicious that they can recoup their money in 1 year. I just highly doubt that unless Apples' factoring in a HUGE increase in Beats Music users or something they aren't telling us.
I like full disclosure on things like this, without, it sounds fishy, that's all.
GOTCHA!!
Huh? What are you talking about?
What's wrong with Beats music? The interface is as good or better than spotify. They have the same catalog as every other streaming service. I think their curated lists are just ok, but I suppose they are better than not having them at all.
Haters gonna hate I suppose.
I didn't dig it. I tried it, I hated it, and i'm not going to use it. I'm not comparing to Spotify, which I also don't use.
And likers are going to like.
I've been using Beyerdynamic DT770's for studio reference headphones for years now and really like them. Well under $1000. I haven't tried their mobile offerings though (the DT770s are a bit bulky to wear outside of the studio). That's kinda what this is about: headphones you'd use on the go with your iPhone/iPad. I know I certainly wouldn't take a pair of $3000 headphones out of my studio.
I understand. I haven't heard or compared the Beyer to the other high end models. But I've run into various high end audio mfg that make super expensive equipment and they do a lot of critical listening to their prototypes on HD800's. All of the people that I know that have heard those say they are the most detailed. but the new Audeze are getting more detailed, but they use planar instead of a typical driver. Beyer has been known to make some decent products, but I just haven't tried any recently.
I did run into a site that has sound recordings of some headphones but I haven't listened to it. Check it out if you are interested. They have the Audeze and other models compared to a few Beyer, but they don't have the HD800's listed. As far as taking outside, I know some people that don't have a problem bringing expensive headphones when traveling. Some people do. So that's a personal choice.
http://www.sonicsense.com/wp/headphone-shootouts/premium-closed-back-headphones-ultrasone-edition-8-fostex-th-900-audeze-lcd-xc
Surprised they aren't rolling Beats Music into iTunes. Yeah the regulatory stuff, but long term there's got to be efficiencies developing one service only.
Wait until the deal is approved. Can't make huge changes until it's signed off on. Until then, its business as usual...