Apple's AirPods fail to earn Consumer Reports recommendation, beaten by Samsung's Galaxy B...

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 85
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,477member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    KITA said:
    Chica said:
    First, it wasn’t until Apple showed the way.  Par for the course on that one.

    Second, sound quality is subjective, but okay, Samsung makes good hardware.

    Third, if they’re saying the Samsung product serves the Android market better and AirPods serve the iOS market better, what’s the point?  
    Or was it Samsung that showed the way with gear icon X, wireless buds and a charging case. Came out before the first gen AirPods. 

    Apple did it first of course though. 
    Incorrect. Both products were released in December, 2016. Dunno date of iconX but AP came out December 13. 
    It came out July 15 2016 - https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-gear-iconx-cord-free-earbuds-hit-the-shelves-today

    I did however notice that you decided to edit Wikipedia just so you could claim they "both" came out in December:

    Capture1


    Capture2
    I would hope that's not true @StrangeDays ;

    You've mentioned before living in New Orleans, and that IP address identifying whoever made the very improper change is also located in New Orleans.
    See above. The wiki already said “DECEMBER 2016”, but incorrectly said AirPods came out months later. AirPods came out December 2016. My edit only reflects the AirPods release date.

    Shame you boys don’t know how to use the change history log. 
    The IconX was put on the market months earlier AFAICT. "Months later" for the AirPods was correct to begin with wasn't it? It was never "the same month" (Dec/16).

    So was your claim that both released the same month right or wrong? You can't blame Wiki. You changed it yesterday, but not correctly based on what you're showing us. 
    You’re reading it wrong. 
    This isn’t that hard. If you can’t understand it that’s not my problem.
    Not that hard to say you were wrong either. 
    I wasn’t. You still don’t get it. The IconX wiki, at the time of my post, very clearly, cited their release date as “DECEMBER 2016”. It has since been changed to July, after my post. I’m not a Samsung historian, so I can’t say which is correct. But the wiki said DECEMBER 2016 at the time of my post. 

    How about you admit you and the other fellow were wrong and completely fabricated that I had anything to do with the dates of when IconX was released, as clearly evidenced by the change history screenshot? My lane is Apple history, and I corrected only the erroneous claim that the APs were announced months after DECEMBER 2016. They weren’t, they were announced in Sept. and released in December, which per the edit state when I read the wiki, was the same month as IconX. (Which has since been edited to July by someone else)
    You changed the claim that AirPods were released "months after" the IconX was didn't you? Perhaps I missed what happened and who changed what.  In any event that didn't need correcting, only the dates that both were originally released to market might have needed clarification. 

    If you are going to take the responsibility of "correcting" Wikipedia you have an obligation to make sure it is accurately done so. Instead what you did was maintain the inaccuracy by saying they were both released the same month without also correcting it to show the IconX was 6 months earlier AFAICT. 

    Aren't you wrong claiming that both were released in December/16 as you did in your original post when proclaiming another poster "wrong"?  Ignore who did what to the Wiki entry if you wish. Such a simple thing to admit to you being wrong to begin with, yet you find it impossible to do.  

    Anyway, the intent is not to put you on the spot anyway, simply wondering how you happened to make that change, what happened to prompt it (apparently your post claiming someone else was wrong?), and why you stopped short of making sure it was an entirely accurate change.  
    edited August 2019 bigtdsCloudTalkinavon b7stevenozKITAmuthuk_vanalingamCarnagechemengin1
  • Reply 62 of 85
    Chica said:
    First, it wasn’t until Apple showed the way.  Par for the course on that one.

    Second, sound quality is subjective, but okay, Samsung makes good hardware.

    Third, if they’re saying the Samsung product serves the Android market better and AirPods serve the iOS market better, what’s the point?  
    Or was it Samsung that showed the way with gear icon X, wireless buds and a charging case. Came out before the first gen AirPods. 

    Apple did it first of course though. 
    I don't think the comment was suggesting Apple was first. It was noting that the Apple release didn't trigger a review but, instead, a review was only done after Samsung's more recent introduction. But, of course, it could simply be that no one really cared about wireless until the success of AirPods so there was no motivation to conduct a review.
  • Reply 63 of 85
    dewmedewme Posts: 4,553member
    BxBorn said:
    Again, I would consider myself an average user and far from an audiophile but I don't think anyone that is an audiophile would rave about either one of these products.
    I tend to agree with your last sentence. AirPods sound good enough within the scope of the use cases they excel at. But I wouldn’t say that they’re my go-to headphones when I want to tune out the outside world and escape into the music. 

    The fact that AirPods let in some ambient background sounds, people’s voices, sirens, alarms, etc., is exactly why I wear them when I’m in an environment where I need to be aware of what’s going on around me, for example while working, at home with other family members, walking on public streets, etc. Their convenience is brilliant. 

    In fact, AirPods have proven to be quite popular for us guinea pigs of the cruel social experiment called “open office plans” because they are a strap-on virtual cube wall that provide some level of isolation from the office scrum without totally disconnecting wearers from their cherished workmates. The dorkiness of their appearance and known leakiness of background sound is also a great visual signal of the wearer’s “shields up but still interruptable” status. If I see a coworker using AirPods I know they can hear me if I try to communicate with them through speech. On the other hand, if they’re wearing huge closed back headphones with 10 gauge wiring plugged into a DAC with dinner plate sized earpieces I’m thinking they are probably in a “zone” and may very well go full Rambo on me if I startle them by trying to pull them outside of whatever sanctum they’re inside by flailing my arms, because I know they can’t possibly hear me. 

    When I’m sitting in cattle class on a noisy plane with Mr Bigmouth or Endless Crying Baby sitting next to me, I want every form of noise isolation and noise cancellation known to man in my headphones. I guess the best of both worlds for a super convenient product like AirPods would be active noise cancellation capability that can be turned on and off to fit more use cases. Let’s see what the G3 AirPods deliver. 
    johnbsirius
  • Reply 64 of 85
    Well it seems like consumers and Consumer Reports have two different opinions. AirPods have pretty much become ubiquitous. Don’t know if I’ve ever see a pair of the Samsung buds “in the wild”. 
  • Reply 65 of 85
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 1,307member
    BxBorn said:
    jcs2305 said:
    Chica said:
    First, it wasn’t until Apple showed the way.  Par for the course on that one.

    Second, sound quality is subjective, but okay, Samsung makes good hardware.

    Third, if they’re saying the Samsung product serves the Android market better and AirPods serve the iOS market better, what’s the point?  
    Or was it Samsung that showed the way with gear icon X, wireless buds and a charging case. Came out before the first gen AirPods. 

    Apple did it first of course though. 
    Incorrect. Both products were released in December, 2016. Dunno date of iconX but AP came out December 13. 

    Chica said:
    First, it wasn’t until Apple showed the way.  Par for the course on that one.

    Second, sound quality is subjective, but okay, Samsung makes good hardware.

    Third, if they’re saying the Samsung product serves the Android market better and AirPods serve the iOS market better, what’s the point?  
    Or was it Samsung that showed the way with gear icon X, wireless buds and a charging case. Came out before the first gen AirPods. 

    Apple did it first of course though. 

    15 July 2016
    Samsung launched the first-generation Gear IconX on 15 July 2016.


    Right so Apple quick came up with the Airpods design and tech, then mass produced them in 5 months after seeing Samsung's product? Riiiigghht...




    You missed the point - a claim was made the the Airpods came out first and implied that Samsung copied Apple which so it was corrected- please un-bunch your fanboy panties, thanks.
    My fanboy panties? Hahaha I don't even own Airpods tough guy.

    My comment wasn't proving that Samsung copied anyone or that Apple did it first. I was commenting on the timing. TIme and time again trolls come here claiming Apple copies features that are way to close to the actual product release to be possible

    I was confirming the release dates from StrangeDays comment since he said that both were released in Dec of 2016. Then the 2nd part of my comment was to the person saying that it could have been the Gear IconX that showed the way.  I guess I could have been more clear with who I was pointing things out too.
    FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 66 of 85
    teonyc said:
    My experience is that they are anti-design-first brands. They hate Dyson as well. Yet I’ve been screwed by buying their recommended Shark that couldn’t do half of what my Dyson can. 
    And my wife vastly prefers her two year old Shark over the three year old Dyson.  To the point where the Dyson was basically given away.

    So from my standpoint, their recommendation of the Shark over the Dyson is completely warranted.
  • Reply 67 of 85
    FotoFoto Posts: 1member
    I am a Consumer Reports subscriber and find their reports have good information and guidance, but sometimes they totally miss the boat. This is one of those times. Ease of use, moving from device to device, size, range, and more make these an amazing bit of techno magic. I didn't buy these for their sound quality. The transparency of external sounds make these much safer for outdoors or in situations where you want to have awareness of what's going on around you. For what these were designed for they are among the best if not the best. If you are looking for quality audio there are much better choices than either of these. You really cannot compare isolating and non-isolating earphones. If you don't like the the sound quality, fine. But to not recommend. Not a fair evaluation. 
    supadav03dewme
  • Reply 68 of 85
    AppleZuluAppleZulu Posts: 1,446member
    They still haven’t figured out how to deal with Apple as a special case in the wider tech market. 
    Why should they deal with Apple, or any company for that matter, as a "special" case?

    Frankly, I've found CU's ratings to be quite useful, especially when paired with the user reviews.  The fact that my experiences differ on some items, both for the better and the opposite, doesn't invalidate their entire ratings system.
    Because, in a misapplied effort to be “impartial,” they often use testing methodologies that directly defeat new technologies.

    They tested HomePods in their speaker testing room, which has acoustic wall and ceiling panels that deaden reflected sounds. HomePod actually uses walls and ceilings to actively cancel unwanted acoustics and to create presence in the room.  They tested battery life in MacBook Pros by disabling software features that eliminate redundant data downloads to extend battery performance. Defeating these innovative features makes the devices more like the competition in the tests, but it entirely misses the point of innovation. 

    If they reviewed restaurants, they’d pour ketchup on everything they taste, and claim that makes them “impartial.” 
    FileMakerFellerdroo
  • Reply 69 of 85
    CloudTalkin said: Is it any lazier than dismissing everything else in their comparison and summing up their conclusion as bass related? 
    Bass was their lead criticism with the track 'So What' by Miles Davis. Then they go on to make claims about the midrange and instruments "blurring together" on that song that has no basis in reality. 'So What' is a fairly quiet song with a limited number of instruments. I can clearly make out every instrument with AirPods and there's plenty of definition of the subtle tones and details in Miles Davis' trumpet, the drums, and the saxophones. There's no 'blurring' at all. To make the problems with their assessment even more clear, if you listen to this song on HomePod, the bass is still fairly subtle in the mix compared to the other instruments...and that's with hardware that supposedly over emphasizes the bass response. It's a flawed review. 

    I noticed they also used the dubious 'ear seal' angle, which ignores the fact that high-end studio headphones don't 'seal' your ear canal either. 

    You keep forgetting to add "in my opinion". /s  You're making declarations as if your words are fact.  They aren't.  They are simply opinion.  Opinion that doesn't line up with their opinions.  You being able to make out every intstrument on your AirPods playing music from your source doesn't negate their impressions of what they heard.  There's also nothing dubious about the ear seal angle.  It most definitely affects the sound.  It ignores facts relative to high-end studio headphones because - this may shock you -  facts relative to high-end headphones are irrelevant in a review about commodity wireless buds.  

    It may indeed be a flawed review.  But it ain't a flawed review based on anything you've mentioned.  You're assessment however...  flawed indeed.  Imo, of course.
  • Reply 70 of 85
    IreneWIreneW Posts: 300member
    teonyc said:
    My experience is that they are anti-design-first brands. They hate Dyson as well. Yet I’ve been screwed by buying their recommended Shark that couldn’t do half of what my Dyson can. 
    And my wife vastly prefers her two year old Shark over the three year old Dyson.  To the point where the Dyson was basically given away.

    So from my standpoint, their recommendation of the Shark over the Dyson is completely warranted.
    Your wife? What do _you_ think of it? Don't you clean as well?
    FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 71 of 85
    CloudTalkin said: You keep forgetting to add "in my opinion". /s  You're making declarations as if your words are fact.  They aren't.  They are simply opinion.  Opinion that doesn't line up with their opinions.  You being able to make out every intstrument on your AirPods playing music from your source doesn't negate their impressions of what they heard.  There's also nothing dubious about the ear seal angle.  It most definitely affects the sound.  It ignores facts relative to high-end studio headphones because - this may shock you -  facts relative to high-end headphones are irrelevant in a review about commodity wireless buds.  
    It's not actually an "opinion" to say that 'So What' by Miles Davis has clear separation between instruments using AirPods. It does. That is a fact. It's complete nonsense to claim otherwise. An example of an actual opinion would be CR saying that they prefer the bass reproduction on the Samsung buds for that song vs. AirPods. That's where personal preference can logically come into play.

    As for plugging your ear canal, it has no impact beyond making outside sounds harder to hear. It doesn't enhance the quality of the sound from headphone itself. If it did, then there wouldn't be any reason for non-ear canal plugging headphones to exist. That's the point. Why make those types of headphones if "sealing" your ear canal was such an improvement for sound? 
  • Reply 72 of 85
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,477member
    Foto said:
    I am a Consumer Reports subscriber and find their reports have good information and guidance, but sometimes they totally miss the boat. This is one of those times. Ease of use, moving from device to device, size, range, and more make these an amazing bit of techno magic. I didn't buy these for their sound quality. The transparency of external sounds make these much safer for outdoors or in situations where you want to have awareness of what's going on around you
    Ambient Aware is a feature of the Samsung Galaxy Buds, allowing the user to control how much of the sound around them gets to intrude. There's also Quick Ambient if you want to hear everything around you. Perhaps the issue of external sounds re AirPods vs Galaxy Buds is actually a non-issue? 
    FileMakerFellermuthuk_vanalingamCarnage
  • Reply 73 of 85
    I'd just like to point out that neither company was the first one to make truly wireless earbuds.  So is it really important to continue to have this argument?  The Bragi Dash truly wireless earbuds were in development and delayed in 2015, but still shipped early 2016 at the latest if I recall correctly.  Why does it matter?  It doesn't.  The point is, Apple took what was out there, saw its potential, and made a version that was truly magical and easy to use for their customers.  Just like they weren't the first personal computer, the first music player, or even the first smart phone.  Being first isn't the point.  It's that their product instantly became a market leader.  Better marketing?  Better product?  Dunno, but that's what happened.  CR should at a minimum recommend them for Apple users, and it's a no brainer.  And I'm a card carrying Apple fan, which again, still is besides the point.
    FileMakerFellermuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 74 of 85
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,258member
    mooredjm said:
    All of the Beats/Apple headphone offerings are relatively low quality from a sound perspective. Beats are for bassheads, Airpods for people who like the functionality and don't care about sound quality. Apple, who claims music is in their DNA, still only offer compressed low-quality audio on Apple Music and at best mediocre audio quality headphones, poor sound capabilities on Macs and iPhones etc. They have never been in the high resolution audio market and prefer to cater to the masses not anyone who is remotely close to being an audiophile. Probably a very accurate analysis by Consumer Reports. Before anyone says I'm an Apple haterl, lets just say I have an iPhone, iPad Pro, 2019 i9 Macbook Pro and the latest Apple watch. Love their products. However when it comes to music streaming/purchase I chose hires music on Quobuz, have Shure KSE 1500 electrostats and use an Astell & Kern SP1000 as the quality from Apple in terms of audio largely sucks.

    You're wrong for many things.  Since 3 people likes your comment, I'm afraid that you mislead others:


    1. All modern MacBooks have one of the best internal speakers out there which only a handful of laptops had.

    15" MacBook Pro 2018 Emissions:
    The speakers of the 2018 MacBook Pro models are also revised. A direct comparison shows a slightly more linear frequency diagram for the new models and the subjective impression confirms the results compared to the already good 2017 model. Apple is still the benchmarks for notebooks in this respect, especially when you consider the height of the base unit.

    Compared to same class
    » 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
    » The best had a delta of 3%, average was 19%, worst was 41%
    Compared to all devices tested
    » 0% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
    » The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
    MacBook 2016 Emissions:

    With a maximum of 84 dB during playing pink noise, the MacBook 12 does not belong to the loudest devices, but it is significantly louder than the average of all devices (77 dB) and certainly subnotebooks (72 dB). Even the 27-inch iMac was only 2 dB louder in our test - respect! The frequency characteristics are also very good and relatively linear from 500 Hz upwards. Compared to our 2015 MacBook sample we could not measure a small peak in the (inaudible) high frequency range. However, this might also have been caused by environment noises. 

    Surprisingly, the MacBook 12 performs significantly better than the MacBook Pro Retina 13 from 2013. The small 12-inch notebook sounds audibly better and even provides more basses - a notable performance in view of the compact case size.


    They aren't external speakers, you can't compare an internal solution to a decent 2.1 unit.  However, that doesn't mean they're crap, especially where laptops speakers are an afterthought to many.
    The same thing can be said on the iPhone & the iMac (Pro), except one & few that I know is better.  Still less than a handful.

    2. Apple's core audio guy is Tomlinson Holman, they got a decent audio team to begin with.  

    3. If you want the comparison to be made, you have to put them with their own class.  Saying that AirPods doesn't sound great to those, does not mean it's worse than Galaxy Buds, which is what we're talking about the whole time.  Putting things out of class and claimed Apple "never cares about audio", you're ignoring facts and mislead others.

    I was trying to put HomePods in here, but they have lots of controversies, so I might just put a link here.  It's still great for what it is.
  • Reply 75 of 85
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,258member
    jcs2305 said:
    mooredjm said:
    All of the Beats/Apple headphone offerings are relatively low quality from a sound perspective. Beats are for bassheads, Airpods for people who like the functionality and don't care about sound quality. Apple, who claims music is in their DNA, still only offer compressed low-quality audio on Apple Music and at best mediocre audio quality headphones, poor sound capabilities on Macs and iPhones etc. They have never been in the high resolution audio market and prefer to cater to the masses not anyone who is remotely close to being an audiophile. Probably a very accurate analysis by Consumer Reports. Before anyone says I'm an Apple haterl, lets just say I have an iPhone, iPad Pro, 2019 i9 Macbook Pro and the latest Apple watch. Love their products. However when it comes to music streaming/purchase I chose hires music on Quobuz, have Shure KSE 1500 electrostats and use an Astell & Kern SP1000 as the quality from Apple in terms of audio largely sucks.
    You mention nearly $7000.00 in gear for super high resolution playback ? That is game Apple and Beats products have never attempted to play in. It's also not the norm when it comes to the average consumer that is looking for headphones or a good mobile music service for playback on the go that doesn't require a an additional device.  I agree with you on Airpods quality. I can only use IEM's that have different sized tips to get a good seal. I have different sized ear canals and a good fit and seal is impossible for me with Airpods.
    From what I know, if you can fit them nicely in your ears, you will have a different result.  If you test them on equipment, they seem to be decent enough.
    edited August 2019
  • Reply 76 of 85
    Part of the sound acoustics have to do with the fact that the Samsung  have an inner ear rubber tip.

    CR Didn’t take that in to consideration. It does a lot to block out the outside world ambience and it adds more volume and Richer sound.

    It’s not that Samsung made incredible speakers, its that they decided to implement the way it goes into the ear in a different way than that of Apple air pods 

    Personally I prefer apples hard plastic that slides in and out easier. It also lets me hear the outside world a little better.

    Everybody who owns Airpods should try this. Go out and buy rubber tips for your AirPods and stick them in your  ear and see how much differently they sound.

    Or If you don’t wanna do that just put your finger on the air pods  outer vent and push gently into your ear.

    You’ll hear Deeper bass,  clear crisper sounds and overall richness. 
  • Reply 77 of 85
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,477member
    Part of the sound acoustics have to do with the fact that the Samsung  have an inner ear rubber tip.

    CR Didn’t take that in to consideration. It does a lot to block out the outside world ambience and it adds more volume and Richer sound.
    Obviously they did.

    Two different designs and two different sounds. If you want more of the outside world to intrude on the sound emanating from the Galaxy Buds then use the earbuds Ambient Aware feature, or if someone is trying to have a short conversation with you use Quick Ambient. The Airpods don't have an option to shut out more of the sounds around you other than using your fingers to press them in harder, at least AFAIK. 

    So if out in public use Ambient controls on the Gear Buds. At home shut out the world if you want. 

    edited August 2019
  • Reply 78 of 85
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,477member
    AppleZulu said:
    They still haven’t figured out how to deal with Apple as a special case in the wider tech market. 
    Why should they deal with Apple, or any company for that matter, as a "special" case?

    Frankly, I've found CU's ratings to be quite useful, especially when paired with the user reviews.  The fact that my experiences differ on some items, both for the better and the opposite, doesn't invalidate their entire ratings system.
    Because, in a misapplied effort to be “impartial,” they often use testing methodologies that directly defeat new technologies.

    They tested HomePods in their speaker testing room, which has acoustic wall and ceiling panels that deaden reflected sounds. HomePod actually uses walls and ceilings to actively cancel unwanted acoustics and to create presence in the room.  They tested battery life in MacBook Pros by disabling software features that eliminate redundant data downloads to extend battery performance. Defeating these innovative features makes the devices more like the competition in the tests, but it entirely misses the point of innovation. 

    If they reviewed restaurants, they’d pour ketchup on everything they taste, and claim that makes them “impartial.” 
    You are misinformed and don't understand sound and sound testing based on what I've read. Proof? Look back at how Apple tested the HomePods. 

    "Apple’s audio team, does much of their work in ‘anechoic’ chambers built to be totally silent.


    The HomePod being tested to see if it produces unwanted noises (Photo: Apple)


    A view inside an anechoic chamber at Apple’s Noise and Vibration lab

    "These strange rooms are lined with foam to absorb the echoes, meaning they can feel like an ‘infinite cave’ with none of the natural reverberation you expect from a normal space. Some are so quiet you can hear your heart beating whilst standing inside them. Apple has built several massive anechoic chambers built to a size, scale and specification that few of its competitors could afford – if they were even ambitious enough to consider building such epic spaces. These chambers all simulate different rooms. One is set above a strange pit of white foam pyramids, which you walk over using a perilous-feeling metal mesh hanging a few feet in the air."

  • Reply 79 of 85
    IreneW said:
    teonyc said:
    My experience is that they are anti-design-first brands. They hate Dyson as well. Yet I’ve been screwed by buying their recommended Shark that couldn’t do half of what my Dyson can. 
    And my wife vastly prefers her two year old Shark over the three year old Dyson.  To the point where the Dyson was basically given away.

    So from my standpoint, their recommendation of the Shark over the Dyson is completely warranted.
    Your wife? What do _you_ think of it? Don't you clean as well?
    No, I do not.  We actually have a "traditional" (not saying it's better than anyone else's) marriage.  I work outside the home, she works inside.  When the kids were home, we divided more, but now that they're all moved out, we divide and conquer.  She prefers it this way, so I'm fine with it. :)
  • Reply 80 of 85
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,258member
    Part of the sound acoustics have to do with the fact that the Samsung  have an inner ear rubber tip.

    CR Didn’t take that in to consideration. It does a lot to block out the outside world ambience and it adds more volume and Richer sound.

    It’s not that Samsung made incredible speakers, its that they decided to implement the way it goes into the ear in a different way than that of Apple air pods 

    Personally I prefer apples hard plastic that slides in and out easier. It also lets me hear the outside world a little better.

    Everybody who owns Airpods should try this. Go out and buy rubber tips for your AirPods and stick them in your  ear and see how much differently they sound.

    Or If you don’t wanna do that just put your finger on the air pods  outer vent and push gently into your ear.

    You’ll hear Deeper bass,  clear crisper sounds and overall richness. 
    Having a rubber tip defeats the purpose of AirPods, it was designed to have maximum comfort for those who fit.
Sign In or Register to comment.