Quote: "He noted the appeal of Beats to both young users as well as black Americans, given the strong reputation Beats products carry in those demographics."
I said this very thing in a previous thread about this. Hate to say it and I am sure to get flamed for it but Apple products are viewed as being for upwardly mobile whites. Yes there are more minorities represented more recently in Apple advertisements but for the most part Apple products appear to be targeted to a white market. That's the way of the world (Earth, Wind, and Fire) but time will tell if this really pans out. It is a smart move if that is what Apple is aiming for. Besides, I do like Dre much better than P-Dummy.
A common misconception. Apple stuff is for everybody when can see with their eyes and feel with their hands what the best and sexiest hardware is. So in the neighborhoods I frequent in LA, I see many, many iPhones in the hands of Latinos and Asians, both men and women. I don't get into South Central or the other 'hoods much, so no personal data from there.
Any white yuppy bias in the demographic is probably economic and historical rather than psychological. Apple-like quality is always aspirational across cultures, I think. Except in Europe, where there's an ongoing reaction, well-deserved, against American corporatism. My reading, anyway.
This rumor certainly has legs - I suspect it is true. And while it is unusual for Apple to acquire a street-recognized brand, this one might work.
The audiophile chatter about the sound quality of Beats vs. Sennheiser/Grado/AKG/whatever can be ignored. If the public really thought that Sennheisers were the "best" headphones, they would have bought more, and they didn't, because the subjective and fashion-based elements of that decision are not neatly tied to specifications and notions of "accuracy" - they are concerned with appearances and a different sort of musical satisfaction. Clearly, the Beats products represent a very appealing sound character to many, many people. And yes, they look cool. Nicely built.
The same irrelevant arguments have been leveled at Bose for years - and in several ways, Bose and Apple are cut from similar cloth, making successful products that have very definite opinions about what they are and how they are to be used. Not the "best" by purely technical measures, but clearly appealing and uniquely well-suited to the real-life use cases of their customer bases. There is no way on earth that "marketing" achieves these numbers by itself.
I can see the appeal of the curated music service to Apple. I can see Apple continuing to sell Beats headphones, and even using the connection to create new related audio offerings that are tightly integrated with the Apple user experience. It will represent a new chapter for Apple, curious to see where it goes.
The main issue I have with this merger is that the know-nothings in the tech press will chime on and on about how this "culturally compatible" merger is the ultimate expression of style-over-substance. The problem here is that if the merger goes through, Apple's critics will be half right.
For people who know anything about Apple, the company values style, but prioritizes substance even more. If anything, Apple thinks things through at greater depth than any other consumer electronics company. They are often viewed as shallow overpriced "toys" for the trendy crowd, yet the actual products are anything but.
With Beats' audio products, the company becomes more about style-over-substance the closer you look. To me, that's where Beats is culturally at odds with what Apple actually is (as opposed to how Apple is perceived in certain circles).
To an uneducated observer (or an obtuse tech reviewer trolling for page views), Apple just makes a bunch of overpriced products that prioritize design over performance. Yet, in actual testing and real world usage, Apple's products will outperform the competition and place the highest priority on the user experience. This is the exact opposite of how Beats audio products come out when scrutinizing the overall product quality closer.
Beats is the exact type of company that Apple's critics claim that Apple is. I understand the potential strategic value of the Beats Music service, and in the grand scheme of overpriced Web 2.0 acquisitions, $3.2 billion seems to go right along with those hyperinflated valuations. But, I also see collateral damage to Apple's hard-fought brand image by acquiring a company whose values are closer to the distorted caricature (put forth by the company's enemies) of what Apple represents.
I'm all for quality headphones. While Beats is certainly crap in terms of sound fidelity, the brand more than makes up for it. Sound quality is very subjective, and some people attribute a lack of bass to low quality (see amazon reviews of etymotic earphones).
I'm all for quality headphones. While Beats is certainly crap in terms of sound fidelity, the brand more than makes up for it. Sound quality is very subjective, and some people attribute a lack of bass to low quality (see amazon reviews of etymotic earphones).
It's the same issue as Bose -- they're not bad products per se, just way overpriced and a poor value compared to other less visibly marketed options on the market.
For my ears, I'm partial to the Grado headphones. For less than $100, their SR-60i and SR-80i models will blow the pants off of other cans costing 3X more. Balance, detail, true sounding bass -- not the bottom heavy mush that Beats serves up. Get into their higher priced $300+ models, and the musicality is off the charts.
Plus, Grado headphones are handmade in Brooklyn, in the same brownstone where they've been making highly regarded phono cartridges since the 50s. They aren't much to look at, but the company invests the money where it counts -- in the sound.
It's the same issue as Bose -- they're not bad products per se, just way overpriced and a poor value compared to other less visibly marketed options on the market.
For my ears, I'm partial to the Grado headphones. For less than $100, their SR-60i and SR-80i models will blow the pants off of other cans costing 3X more. Balance, detail, true sounding bass -- not the bottom heavy mush that Beats serves up. Get into their higher priced $300+ models, and the musicality is off the charts.
Plus, Grado headphones are handmade in Brooklyn, in the same brownstone where they've been making highly regarded phono cartridges since the 50s. They aren't much to look at, but the company invests the money where it counts -- in the sound.
Until Apple rereleased the new Mac Pro many were saying that Apple no longer cared about the pro market, and many are still saying it. Comparing Apple earbuds to just abut any other earbuds on the market puts Apple dead last. Don't give us this, Beats quality is below Apple standards crap. Besides, Beats is not claiming to be studio reference headphones. They are marketed as hip and their target market is young people in the street, on the bus, in the mall, etc. It is a fashion accessory not a professional piece of kit.
Does Apple normally deny rumours within the first couple of days? If so, this acquisition might very well be true, no matter what the media says or blogs blog.
The're holding for a crowd -- milking it to get a little attention
Right, there are so many 'better' head/earphones out there, why would Apple invest in these sub-par devices? Why the hell would Apple become interested in high margin headphones? Pull your heads out of the sand. Apple is NOT investing in Beats for their headphones. They are not investing in Beats for their Image, e.g. Apple needs a dose of 'cool'. Obviously, 3.2 billion is buying a lot more than headphones and image. There may be connections to the music industry via Iovine that we just aren't privy to. Sit back, listen, analyze. The answers will come soon enough.
Until Apple rereleased the new Mac Pro many were saying that Apple no longer cared about the pro market, and many are still saying it. Comparing Apple earbuds to just abut any other earbuds on the market puts Apple dead last. Don't give us this, Beats quality is below Apple standards crap. Besides, Beats is not claiming to be studio reference headphones. They are marketed as hip and their target market is young people in the street, on the bus, in the mall, etc. It is a fashion accessory not a professional piece of kit.
I totally agree about the fashion branding of Beats. The people I see wearing them always seem to be wearing the latest "cool" clothing and accessories.
When I saw "bass-heavy Beats headphones aren't a quality product built to the standard that they expect from Apple devices" I laughed because until the Mastered for iTunes initiative Apple never did anything to suggest they cared about sound quality in their tracks or hardware. Those ubiquitous white earbuds were never even 'good enough' for me. First of all they wouldn't stay in my ears so I had to replace them, but even standing around holding them in my ears they didn't sound like a quality product. First replacements fit really nicely, but were muddy and bass heavy. Second replacements hurt when I put them in my ears so I gave them to my wife who finds them fine for her ears. Third replacements I decided to move up market a bit and got some Sennheisers. Sound is good, but the ear rubbers are way too soft so I put my original replacement bud ear pieces on them. Worked great until my cord got snagged on something in a crowd and I lost one of them. I have yet to find a replacement of the right size and flexibility to form a perfect seal.
I'll repost something that I posted on the other Beats-story-du-heure:
Oh, enough with this silly headphone snobbery. It would be just tiresome if it weren't so laughably off.
Regardless of what you think or say, with lossy AAC/MP3 files, having a great versus a mediocre headphone just gets you.... mediocre sound. (As to the bass-heavy critique -- that others have brought up -- I wish people would just change the equalizer preset and stop the whining).
It's the same issue as Bose -- they're not bad products per se, just way overpriced and a poor value compared to other less visibly marketed options on the market.
For my ears, I'm partial to the Grado headphones. For less than $100, their SR-60i and SR-80i models will blow the pants off of other cans costing 3X more. Balance, detail, true sounding bass -- not the bottom heavy mush that Beats serves up. Get into their higher priced $300+ models, and the musicality is off the charts.
Plus, Grado headphones are handmade in Brooklyn, in the same brownstone where they've been making highly regarded phono cartridges since the 50s. They aren't much to look at, but the company invests the money where it counts -- in the sound.
Until Apple rereleased the new Mac Pro many were saying that Apple no longer cared about the pro market, and many are still saying it. Comparing Apple earbuds to just abut any other earbuds on the market puts Apple dead last. Don't give us this, Beats quality is below Apple standards crap. Besides, Beats is not claiming to be studio reference headphones. They are marketed as hip and their target market is young people in the street, on the bus, in the mall, etc. It is a fashion accessory not a professional piece of kit.
There is no way that Apple will use the beats branding on their devices! (here's hoping anyway). The brand has already been tainted across several other electronic device manufacturers in the past... Other than the beat's competing music service and Iovine's know how of the music industry, I don't see how the headphones hardware side can be of any real value. With $3.2 Billion you can build a f-ing great headphone from scratch! Not like these things have massive patents.
There is no confirmation until one of the two companies (which include their top executives) directly and fully making statements that a sale has been made.
"Five reasons why Apple has bought headphone company Beats (by Dr Dre)"
Maybe they did it because they have such a classy and colourful headphone?
[image]
Based on the infer that has come out over the past 4 days there are a lot more than 5 reasons for such a purchase and, if true, Apple looks to be getting a good deal that will quickly increase their own profits.
Comments
By your logic P Diddy should be named to Apple's board of directors then- he extremely successful "business"man with many music contacts.
A common misconception. Apple stuff is for everybody when can see with their eyes and feel with their hands what the best and sexiest hardware is. So in the neighborhoods I frequent in LA, I see many, many iPhones in the hands of Latinos and Asians, both men and women. I don't get into South Central or the other 'hoods much, so no personal data from there.
Any white yuppy bias in the demographic is probably economic and historical rather than psychological. Apple-like quality is always aspirational across cultures, I think. Except in Europe, where there's an ongoing reaction, well-deserved, against American corporatism. My reading, anyway.
The audiophile chatter about the sound quality of Beats vs. Sennheiser/Grado/AKG/whatever can be ignored. If the public really thought that Sennheisers were the "best" headphones, they would have bought more, and they didn't, because the subjective and fashion-based elements of that decision are not neatly tied to specifications and notions of "accuracy" - they are concerned with appearances and a different sort of musical satisfaction. Clearly, the Beats products represent a very appealing sound character to many, many people. And yes, they look cool. Nicely built.
The same irrelevant arguments have been leveled at Bose for years - and in several ways, Bose and Apple are cut from similar cloth, making successful products that have very definite opinions about what they are and how they are to be used. Not the "best" by purely technical measures, but clearly appealing and uniquely well-suited to the real-life use cases of their customer bases. There is no way on earth that "marketing" achieves these numbers by itself.
I can see the appeal of the curated music service to Apple. I can see Apple continuing to sell Beats headphones, and even using the connection to create new related audio offerings that are tightly integrated with the Apple user experience. It will represent a new chapter for Apple, curious to see where it goes.
The main issue I have with this merger is that the know-nothings in the tech press will chime on and on about how this "culturally compatible" merger is the ultimate expression of style-over-substance. The problem here is that if the merger goes through, Apple's critics will be half right.
For people who know anything about Apple, the company values style, but prioritizes substance even more. If anything, Apple thinks things through at greater depth than any other consumer electronics company. They are often viewed as shallow overpriced "toys" for the trendy crowd, yet the actual products are anything but.
With Beats' audio products, the company becomes more about style-over-substance the closer you look. To me, that's where Beats is culturally at odds with what Apple actually is (as opposed to how Apple is perceived in certain circles).
To an uneducated observer (or an obtuse tech reviewer trolling for page views), Apple just makes a bunch of overpriced products that prioritize design over performance. Yet, in actual testing and real world usage, Apple's products will outperform the competition and place the highest priority on the user experience. This is the exact opposite of how Beats audio products come out when scrutinizing the overall product quality closer.
Beats is the exact type of company that Apple's critics claim that Apple is. I understand the potential strategic value of the Beats Music service, and in the grand scheme of overpriced Web 2.0 acquisitions, $3.2 billion seems to go right along with those hyperinflated valuations. But, I also see collateral damage to Apple's hard-fought brand image by acquiring a company whose values are closer to the distorted caricature (put forth by the company's enemies) of what Apple represents.
Maybe Beats will finally produce a product that I would remotely consider buying because up to now, their entire product line is crap.
3.2M is a typo at the end of the article. Should be 3.2B
Hey, $3.2 million? That would be worth it.
I'm all for quality headphones. While Beats is certainly crap in terms of sound fidelity, the brand more than makes up for it. Sound quality is very subjective, and some people attribute a lack of bass to low quality (see amazon reviews of etymotic earphones).
It's the same issue as Bose -- they're not bad products per se, just way overpriced and a poor value compared to other less visibly marketed options on the market.
For my ears, I'm partial to the Grado headphones. For less than $100, their SR-60i and SR-80i models will blow the pants off of other cans costing 3X more. Balance, detail, true sounding bass -- not the bottom heavy mush that Beats serves up. Get into their higher priced $300+ models, and the musicality is off the charts.
Plus, Grado headphones are handmade in Brooklyn, in the same brownstone where they've been making highly regarded phono cartridges since the 50s. They aren't much to look at, but the company invests the money where it counts -- in the sound.
Say what? Eminen's not Blak - nor vanilla ice. Blondie? Why are you presuming all rappers to be black? Now that's prejudiced.
I'm prejudiced against crappy products- Beats.
It's the same issue as Bose -- they're not bad products per se, just way overpriced and a poor value compared to other less visibly marketed options on the market.
For my ears, I'm partial to the Grado headphones. For less than $100, their SR-60i and SR-80i models will blow the pants off of other cans costing 3X more. Balance, detail, true sounding bass -- not the bottom heavy mush that Beats serves up. Get into their higher priced $300+ models, and the musicality is off the charts.
Plus, Grado headphones are handmade in Brooklyn, in the same brownstone where they've been making highly regarded phono cartridges since the 50s. They aren't much to look at, but the company invests the money where it counts -- in the sound.
Until Apple rereleased the new Mac Pro many were saying that Apple no longer cared about the pro market, and many are still saying it. Comparing Apple earbuds to just abut any other earbuds on the market puts Apple dead last. Don't give us this, Beats quality is below Apple standards crap. Besides, Beats is not claiming to be studio reference headphones. They are marketed as hip and their target market is young people in the street, on the bus, in the mall, etc. It is a fashion accessory not a professional piece of kit.
The're holding for a crowd -- milking it to get a little attention
Pull your heads out of the sand. Apple is NOT investing in Beats for their headphones. They are not investing in Beats for their Image, e.g. Apple needs a dose of 'cool'. Obviously, 3.2 billion is buying a lot more than headphones and image. There may be connections to the music industry via Iovine that we just aren't privy to. Sit back, listen, analyze. The answers will come soon enough.
Until Apple rereleased the new Mac Pro many were saying that Apple no longer cared about the pro market, and many are still saying it. Comparing Apple earbuds to just abut any other earbuds on the market puts Apple dead last. Don't give us this, Beats quality is below Apple standards crap. Besides, Beats is not claiming to be studio reference headphones. They are marketed as hip and their target market is young people in the street, on the bus, in the mall, etc. It is a fashion accessory not a professional piece of kit.
I totally agree about the fashion branding of Beats. The people I see wearing them always seem to be wearing the latest "cool" clothing and accessories.
When I saw "bass-heavy Beats headphones aren't a quality product built to the standard that they expect from Apple devices" I laughed because until the Mastered for iTunes initiative Apple never did anything to suggest they cared about sound quality in their tracks or hardware. Those ubiquitous white earbuds were never even 'good enough' for me. First of all they wouldn't stay in my ears so I had to replace them, but even standing around holding them in my ears they didn't sound like a quality product. First replacements fit really nicely, but were muddy and bass heavy. Second replacements hurt when I put them in my ears so I gave them to my wife who finds them fine for her ears. Third replacements I decided to move up market a bit and got some Sennheisers. Sound is good, but the ear rubbers are way too soft so I put my original replacement bud ear pieces on them. Worked great until my cord got snagged on something in a crowd and I lost one of them. I have yet to find a replacement of the right size and flexibility to form a perfect seal.
The best headphone is the one you have with you!
That's OK -- just don't take in a Movie ...
Clap ... Clap ... Clap!
Eddie Cue goes fandangoing off to negotiations with the record companies with Jimmy and the good Dr in tow ..
Hey, guys here's what we're about ... [let me make you an offer you can't refuse]
I'm really hoping Apple is suckering Google, Microsoft or Samsung into buying Beats for $5 billion
There is no way that Apple will use the beats branding on their devices! (here's hoping anyway). The brand has already been tainted across several other electronic device manufacturers in the past... Other than the beat's competing music service and Iovine's know how of the music industry, I don't see how the headphones hardware side can be of any real value. With $3.2 Billion you can build a f-ing great headphone from scratch! Not like these things have massive patents.
Of course. How would two things being compatible give a negative impression.
There is no confirmation until one of the two companies (which include their top executives) directly and fully making statements that a sale has been made.
Based on the infer that has come out over the past 4 days there are a lot more than 5 reasons for such a purchase and, if true, Apple looks to be getting a good deal that will quickly increase their own profits.
There are a plenty of people here that would still bitch and moan, and claim Apple is wasting their money.