Apple launches $350 Beats Studio 3 Wireless headphones with W1 chip, improved noise cancel...

Posted:
in General Discussion edited September 2017
Apple on Monday updated its top-of-the-line Beats Studio headphones, giving them the W1 chip for simple pairing, and also adding more advanced noise cancelation technology.




The new Beats Studio 3 Wireless headphones are now available to preorder from Apple, and ship in mid-October. They come in "Shadow Gray," "Porcelain Rose," "Matte Black," white, red, and blue.

Priced at $349.95, the Beats Studio 3 Wireless headphones feature what Apple has branded as Pure Adaptive Noise Canceling, which the company says delivers a premium listening experience blocking out distractions. Pure ANC continuously pinpoints and blocks external sounds while automatically responding to individual fit and music playback.




Pure ANC also features real-time audio calibration, constantly optimizing sound output to preserve clarity, range, emotion, and a premium listening experience, Apple said.

Battery life has also been improved, offering up to 22 hours of playback with Pure ANC, or 40 hours if noise canceling is disabled.




Apple has also included its "Fast Fuel" technology, allowing 10 minutes of charging to provide 3 hours of playback. Notably charging is done via a micro USB cable, not Lightning or USB-C.

The Bluetooth headphones feature Apple's W1 chip, allowing automatic syncing between Apple devices logged into the same iCloud account. The update brings Apple's W1 chip to the entire lineup of wireless Beats headphones.

Like the previous Studio headphones, the latest model features onboard call and music controls, as well as volume. The headphones also come with a RemoteTalk Cable with inline controls for wired playback.

Where to buy

B&H Photo, an Apple authorized reseller, is currently accepting pre-orders for the new Studio3 headphones. Priced at $349.95, these headphones qualify for free expedited shipping to contiguous U.S. addresses with no sales tax collected outside NY and NJ. For many shoppers outside those two states, this averages out to $28 in savings compared to buying direct.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 51
    jpcguy89jpcguy89 Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    These look epic. Looks like it's time to start saving those pennies.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 51
    Too bad I just bought Beoplay H7 which are great, fit and finish is excellent, and they have removable batteries which removes the hassle of replacing it in the future.
  • Reply 3 of 51
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,800member
    I'm surprised that these updated Studio 3's still come with a micro-USB-B port on the device instead of Lightning or USB-C for charging.
    dewmevukasikawatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 51
    I am sure there'll be lots of the usual "oh, they're all style not substance" or "too much base/treble/midrange/whatever" type posts soon enough.

    So let me say something I've said a couple of times before, here on AI: the Beats Wireless Studio is the best pair of headphones I've ever owned. And I've owned a fair number in the past 45 years.
    edited September 2017 repressthishmurchisonslprescottwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 51
    Soli said:
    I'm surprised that these updated Studio 3's still come with a micro-USB-B port on the device instead of Lightning or USB-C for charging.

    I am at annoyed at this too. Micro USB is the devil and I've basically refused to buy any devices any more that require this. I was absolutely ready to pull the plug on a set of these headphones until I saw that.  For me at this point it's Lightning or USB-C or nothing.
    repressthisdewmehmurchisonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 51
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  
    edited September 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 51
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,800member
    kkqd1337 said:
    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  
    Don't you also see teenagers with Apple products?
    anantksundaramwatto_cobrapatchythepiratestanthemanbancho
  • Reply 8 of 51
    Soli said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  
    Don't you also see teenagers with Apple products?
    Your right. What I'm saying doesn't  really make sense, but that's how I feel about the Beats brand. The background of the company and their products all just screams kids toys to me.
    entropysstantheman
  • Reply 9 of 51
    idreyidrey Posts: 640member
    I had the power beats 3, until I lost them. Got them when they first came out. Liked them a lot. I only have one issue. With in six weeks of use they started shutting down for no reason with in 1 hour of use. Got them change same thing. Than I lost them so couldn’t send them back again. And now I don’t know what to get. I haven’t really made any research on the issue to see if I was the only lucky one having that issue. But now  I’m skeptical of buyin headphones with the w1 chip. 
  • Reply 10 of 51
    irelandireland Posts: 17,584member
    Micro-USB is the worst connector imaginable. It completely turns me off any interest in these. The thought of being able to charge these with your handy Lightning iPhone charger seems obvious. They are after all wireless.
    edited September 2017 repressthisssaylerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 51
    kkqd1337 said:
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  


    You made the mistake of not realizing that Apple didn't become the most valuable company in the world, and set records for most revenue ever,  by happenstance.  When pundits criticized Apple for "overpaying" for Beats, they focused solely on the streaming business, when the secret was the headphone and wireless business.  The markups are huge for Beats and Apple is now the largest producer of wireless headphones in the world, and owns over 60% of the entire worldwide market for premium headphones >$200.  Because Apple had vision that wireless would soon dominate the world's markets and the value of the Beats brand,  Apple's move was a financial stroke of genius.   The cash just keeps pouring in when you make good business decisions.


    loquiturcyberzombierepressthisbadmonkanantksundaramwatto_cobraRayz2016
  • Reply 12 of 51
    Notsofast said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  


    You made the mistake of not realizing that Apple didn't become the most valuable company in the world, and set records for most revenue ever,  by happenstance.  When pundits criticized Apple for "overpaying" for Beats, they focused solely on the streaming business, when the secret was the headphone and wireless business.  The markups are huge for Beats and Apple is now the largest producer of wireless headphones in the world, and owns over 60% of the entire worldwide market for premium headphones >$200.  Because Apple had vision that wireless would soon dominate the world's markets and the value of the Beats brand,  Apple's move was a financial stroke of genius.   The cash just keeps pouring in when you make good business decisions.


    I think apple could have made better products and been even more successful without the baggage that beats came with. It would have cost more, taken longer - but am sure it would have been worth it. Apple was in a position to create a market disrupting product from scratch but instead just chose the lazy option and bought beats.

    And I agree their streaming service was certaintly not worth anything. 
  • Reply 13 of 51
    entropysentropys Posts: 1,698member
    kkqd1337 said:
    Notsofast said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  


    You made the mistake of not realizing that Apple didn't become the most valuable company in the world, and set records for most revenue ever,  by happenstance.  When pundits criticized Apple for "overpaying" for Beats, they focused solely on the streaming business, when the secret was the headphone and wireless business.  The markups are huge for Beats and Apple is now the largest producer of wireless headphones in the world, and owns over 60% of the entire worldwide market for premium headphones >$200.  Because Apple had vision that wireless would soon dominate the world's markets and the value of the Beats brand,  Apple's move was a financial stroke of genius.   The cash just keeps pouring in when you make good business decisions.


    I think apple could have made better products and been even more successful without the baggage that beats came with. It would have cost more, taken longer - but am sure it would have been worth it. Apple was in a position to create a market disrupting product from scratch but instead just chose the lazy option and bought beats.

    And I agree their streaming service was certaintly not worth anything. 
    So what you are saying is Apple execs and Board chose the MBA path to fame and fortune, not the Steve Jobs path.😜

    And yes, Beats' streaming service was certainly not worth anything.
  • Reply 14 of 51
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    entropys said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    Notsofast said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  


    You made the mistake of not realizing that Apple didn't become the most valuable company in the world, and set records for most revenue ever,  by happenstance.  When pundits criticized Apple for "overpaying" for Beats, they focused solely on the streaming business, when the secret was the headphone and wireless business.  The markups are huge for Beats and Apple is now the largest producer of wireless headphones in the world, and owns over 60% of the entire worldwide market for premium headphones >$200.  Because Apple had vision that wireless would soon dominate the world's markets and the value of the Beats brand,  Apple's move was a financial stroke of genius.   The cash just keeps pouring in when you make good business decisions.


    I think apple could have made better products and been even more successful without the baggage that beats came with. It would have cost more, taken longer - but am sure it would have been worth it. Apple was in a position to create a market disrupting product from scratch but instead just chose the lazy option and bought beats.

    And I agree their streaming service was certaintly not worth anything. 
    So what you are saying is Apple execs and Board chose the MBA path to fame and fortune, not the Steve Jobs path.😜

    And yes, Beats' streaming service was certainly not worth anything.
    When you buy a company as big as Beats, you don't piss off the existing clients by changing every product they're buying for no good reason. Even Apple know this.

    2 years later you got the Airpods, which by all measures is a resounding success. You think there is no link?

    Jobs knew that profitability was the key to actually getting good products and that's one of the reason he got Cook on board from day one and culled the whole product line.


    If buying Beats led eventually to the Airpods (which I'm sure it has) which is 100% a type of product Jobs would support, they've done very good.
    Solitmaywatto_cobraedred
  • Reply 15 of 51
    kkqd1337 said:
    Notsofast said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  


    You made the mistake of not realizing that Apple didn't become the most valuable company in the world, and set records for most revenue ever,  by happenstance.  When pundits criticized Apple for "overpaying" for Beats, they focused solely on the streaming business, when the secret was the headphone and wireless business.  The markups are huge for Beats and Apple is now the largest producer of wireless headphones in the world, and owns over 60% of the entire worldwide market for premium headphones >$200.  Because Apple had vision that wireless would soon dominate the world's markets and the value of the Beats brand,  Apple's move was a financial stroke of genius.   The cash just keeps pouring in when you make good business decisions.


    I think apple could have made better products and been even more successful without the baggage that beats came with. It would have cost more, taken longer - but am sure it would have been worth it. Apple was in a position to create a market disrupting product from scratch but instead just chose the lazy option and bought beats.

    And I agree their streaming service was certaintly not worth anything. 
    The streaming service was worth lots.  Apple Music went from nothing to number two in the world in record time, and now has probably close to 35 million paying subscribers.  You may not like them, and Beats aren't my choice in headphones, but you are disregarding the cultural relevancy of the Beats brand to the hundreds of millions of people who now buy their products.  It isn't about "disrupting" the market, Beats doesn't do that, it's about branding Apple's headphones and music business with the the people who listen to music and buy the most headphones.  If you doubt this, ask yourself why Apple has kept the Beats brand out front and has only expanded it's use.  

    Again, I know the temptation is to focus on an "audiophile" approach to the headphone business; hence all the pundits criticizing Apple for not buy a company like Bang and Olufsen, but Apple didn't need nor want that and it would have been a horrible business decision.
    watto_cobraRayz2016edredpatchythepirate
  • Reply 16 of 51
    Maybe it's just me, but I've found the Beats wireless headphones aren't made for people with large noggins, just small-skulled folks. They press on the sides too hard.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 17 of 51
    Notsofast said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    Notsofast said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  


    You made the mistake of not realizing that Apple didn't become the most valuable company in the world, and set records for most revenue ever,  by happenstance.  When pundits criticized Apple for "overpaying" for Beats, they focused solely on the streaming business, when the secret was the headphone and wireless business.  The markups are huge for Beats and Apple is now the largest producer of wireless headphones in the world, and owns over 60% of the entire worldwide market for premium headphones >$200.  Because Apple had vision that wireless would soon dominate the world's markets and the value of the Beats brand,  Apple's move was a financial stroke of genius.   The cash just keeps pouring in when you make good business decisions.


    I think apple could have made better products and been even more successful without the baggage that beats came with. It would have cost more, taken longer - but am sure it would have been worth it. Apple was in a position to create a market disrupting product from scratch but instead just chose the lazy option and bought beats.

    And I agree their streaming service was certaintly not worth anything. 
    The streaming service was worth lots.  Apple Music went from nothing to number two in the world in record time, and now has probably close to 35 million paying subscribers.  You may not like them, and Beats aren't my choice in headphones, but you are disregarding the cultural relevancy of the Beats brand to the hundreds of millions of people who now buy their products.  It isn't about "disrupting" the market, Beats doesn't do that, it's about branding Apple's headphones and music business with the the people who listen to music and buy the most headphones.  If you doubt this, ask yourself why Apple has kept the Beats brand out front and has only expanded it's use.  

    Again, I know the temptation is to focus on an "audiophile" approach to the headphone business; hence all the pundits criticizing Apple for not buy a company like Bang and Olufsen, but Apple didn't need nor want that and it would have been a horrible business decision.
    Lol 

    This is all getting a bit deep

    I basically just wish Apple made a good pair of noise cancelling headphones that a professional adult wouldn't be embarrassed to wear. I'm not some audiophile nerd or anything.

    This boils down to a matter of taste of course and I'm just one person, and I'm probably a lot more demanding and particular than most people. 
  • Reply 18 of 51
    irelandireland Posts: 17,584member
    Maybe it's just me, but I've found the Beats wireless headphones aren't made for people with large noggins, just small-skulled folks. They press on the sides too hard.
    Yeah I heard something like this on a YouTube video. I get feeling the Studios are a physically larger inner dimension though. Me I’ll stick with my Bose AE2’s and save a fortune.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 19 of 51
    irelandireland Posts: 17,584member
    kkqd1337 said:
    I think Bose need some good competition in the noise cancelling market so this is good. 

    It might sound trivial but I actually have more of a problem with the Beats brand. I was surprised apple invested in it. I'm in my 30's and feel too old to wear these - I always see teenagers or very young kids with the colourful ones with them in airports - I'd feel embarrassed to have some.  
    I can see your point. That you’d feel embarrassed to wear the Beats brand though? Does that say more about those teenagers or you? There’s many pairs of Beats that are minimal and understated in their design. You may need to get over yourself. If you had better reasoning like preferring Bose or something that’d be a more legit argument. Otherwise it just sounds a lot like insecurity. I wouldn’t buy them for price reasons. Design wise they look clean though.
    edited September 2017 patchythepirate
  • Reply 20 of 51
    Apple, you had me until micro USB. What a head scratcher on a $350 product. I'll keep my Bose QC headphones until you figure this out.
    watto_cobrawilliamlondon
Sign In or Register to comment.