Nothing new here
Apple gear has always been all style and no substance.
Apple pitches its Powerbeats headphones to the public with images of celebrated athletes and ad copy insisting that the devices are durable and sweat resistant. But a handful of people who purchased Powerbeats insist their costly head clamps are defective junk, and they're suing Apple over false advertising and its alleged …
Sorry, but anyone who punts $200 for consumer grade headphones is an idiot. Go to Amazon, search for reference headphones and buy a $50 set of Samson's. They sound incredible and are NEUTRAL! beats are nothing more than over-hyped bass biased headphones with very clever marketing.
And good luck in the lawsuit. This is Apple after all. Even if they loose, they'll never pay out.
@goldcd, Try these (the triple-driver version):
...with Comply Isolation 600 Small foam tips (I used medium on Klipsch and Shure, but the diameter of the earpiece is larger on these, so you need a smaller tip). Comfortable enough for all-day-every-day in the office use, and sound better than anything I've tried in the $200 range, over-the-ear or otherwise.
I don't think the complaint is about the crap sound though, but more the fact that when wearing the headphones in a damp sweaty location they got stained. If the case was that the headphones sound crap then I'd have sympathy but I don't think the complainants should win this particular case - it should be obvious that headphones would get sweat damaged in that sort of environment.
@Not also known as SC - "I don't think the complainants should win this particular case - it should be obvious that headphones would get sweat damaged in that sort of environment."
Unless they were sold with advertising stating that they would work in those conditions.
If only they stated this in the story you've commented on, like perhaps, across the first few paragraphs....
"I don't think the complaint is about the crap sound though, but more the fact that when wearing the headphones in a damp sweaty location they got stained."
According to the article, main complaint is battery life that very quickly degrades, making them unfit for purpose.
" it should be obvious that headphones would get sweat damaged in that sort of environment."
They were explicitly marketed as water-resistant, so, no, not obvious at all. Apple were claiming the exact opposite
Well, I wouldn't drop $200 for a pair of earphones/headphones from some little upstart (which Beats effectively was until Apple gobbled them up)... but Sennheiser (or any other well-established audio specialist) yes, especially when that specialist has some of the best customer service available (a no-quibble exchange policy when something breaks in the first year or two).
But yeah... If you can drop less dosh for a really great-sounding set of ear cans, why would you drop a stack for something 'because image'...
Regarding Sennheiser, they have some really quite good (wired) headphones under £50, and given the beating I tend to give my headphones, that makes a lot of sense. I'm a Sennheiser fan in general, but they do seem a bit two-headed at times, the kit is mostly very good but some of the prices are possibly a bit much; I'm thinking here of the radio microphones we use at work.
Seriously, unless your idea of working out is walking on a treadmill for half an hour you can get some perfectly adequate ones on Amazon for around £20. Frankly the noise the blood makes pumping round my head sound quality is irrelevant so you might as well go for something that's effectively disposable so you're not worried the waterfall of sweat is going to short them out. What? Just me?
Now if you want something that provides a quality listening experience when you're not fighting the signs of ageing by making yourself hot and sweaty, don't buy Beats, do what John 104 said above.
Seriously, unless your idea of working out is walking on a treadmill for half an hour
Don't scare me. mate! My idea of a strenuous workout is lying back on the couch with a beer, watching somebody else do a sweaty workout. All that watching, it's hard work, you know, but somebody has to do it.
Link generally SFW, by the way.
In the words of Arnold, this appears to be a "teachable moment".
I'm not going to touch on the merits of the case because I don't know the details and so have nothing useful to add in that regard.
But FFS people, think for a minute before you compare a set of $50 set of *wired, over-the-head, heavy* headphones to a $200 set of *bluetooth, over-the-ear, lightweight* headphones. Telling someone that who wants one kind of headset that they are a moron because they don't want a completely different kind of headset does nothing more than point out the stupidity of the person offering the "advice".
OK. Samson RTE 2 - Bluetooth. $47. 40mm driver, rechargeable, blah blah.
Argue all you want, but $200 is still a hilarious price for crap headphones. These ones don't have a cool B on them, but I bet you could fix that with a sharpie and impress all your friends as you jog along prettily with your $1,000 iPhone on the arm holder, you know, so everyone can see what you bought.
Ok, at least now we're in the same territory. Now how well do they actually work? (Also, those are still over-head headphones, which make it impossible to wear a bicycle helmet)
I've bought many pairs of sub $100 BT headsets over the years. I had subsequently given up and written off the entire technology because Every. Single. One. Failed. The audio quality was barely better than radio. And that assumed I could maintain a connection at all. The only way I could have reliable connectivity was if I kept my phone within 2-3 feet of the headphones, unobstructed (ie: having the phone in my pants pocket was enough to disrupt signal).
I took a chance on a pair of BeatX headphones, and they are the very first BT headphones I have *ever* owned, that didn't give me grief. Were they expensive? Yes. But I have cumulatively spent 3 times that amount over the years on crap "inexpensive" headsets that I ultimately binned. In fact, the only way I've been able to cause connection issues was to stand near an electrical room that puts out almost enough RF to light a florescent bulb.
So go on and be snide. But the facts speak for themselves.
But FFS people, think for a minute before you compare a set of $50 set of *wired, over-the-head, heavy* headphones to a $200 set of *bluetooth, over-the-ear, lightweight* headphones.
Well, my neighbourhood supermarket in Helsinki sells quite usable bluetooth, over-the-ear, lightweight headphones for about 50 euros (pretty much the same in $). These things have come down in price.
Last time I looked, 200 euros or more was required only for noise-cancelling headphones with a recognized brand like Sennheiser.
Um, not defending Apple by any stretch, but I do believe that battery life tends to diminish with or without design defects.
As such, pretending there is a design defect is going to be an uphill battle.
But hey, I wish them all the luck. It's about time Apple's lies got caught.
Um, not defending Apple by any stretch, but I do believe that battery life tends to diminish with or without design defects.
Your average apple customer doesn't know that - I imagine $200 vs $50 and the advertising claims durability and long life (along with the usual unspoken apple lifestyle promises) - you expect the battery life to be three times longer.
It's the Samuel Vimes 'boot's issue - and someones noticed the expensive boots are cardboard, not hard wearing leather.
Apples over-hyped claims have come back to bite them.
I've been thinking about the 'false advertising' side of this and I feel that charging such a high price for such a cheaply-made product is a form of false advertising. (Not necessarily in the legal sense, of course, which is really all that matters to Apple.)
One can talk about fashion and perhaps use the argument that Apple sells fashion items and so slapping a funky styling and a prestige logo on a cheaply made set of headphones and charging hundreds of dollars for it is clearly not unique.
The big difference between (say) a $200 t-shirt and these $200 headphones is that, when buying a $200 cotton t-shirt, you are not under any misconception that the item is made from some different material than the $20 shirt in the next store. And, if you are under that misconception, a quick glance at the tag will disabuse you of that. You have likely bought, owned and worn hundreds of t-shirts and similar items of clothing made from the same material and have a pool of experience and knowledge about how such a shirt will perform. You will also likely have a fair idea of the construction as, even if you have never seen a commodity t-shirt being made, you can intuit the process well enough.
A set of headphones is rather different; 99% of consumers do not understand how they actually work or how they are made or even what components are involved. Thus, they do not know why one pair might cost more than another. Also unlike t-shirts, there are large differences in actual, measurable performance beyond simple longevity and comfort - the latter of which can be subjective.
It is possible that a person buying a pair of headphones may have owned many other sets but the vast majority will be buying their first, second or maybe third set of headphones. Thus, not only will these people likely have little to no intellectual understanding of how headphones work, or what components are involved, they also have little in the way of personal experience.
Is that legally relevant?
Probably not, but I think it should be - at least in theory, if not specifically in this instance as $200 is actually not that expensive for a set of headphones. Generally, however, I think it should be recognised that the PRICE of an item carries an implication of the quality of that item, to a certain extent.
After all, if a $20 set of headphones were rubbish then everyone would be quick to point out that 'you get what you pay for' and would agree that no reasonable person would expect good quality at that price. Pricing a pair of headphones at $200 therefore sends a message that this pair is rather a lot better (not 10x, of course) than the $20 pair and it should not be considered unreasonable for an average consumer* - the target market - to say that such a message was conveyed to them by the manufacturer who gave the product that price.
The disclaimer is that I do not think there's a legal case unless Apple are refusing to give refunds. Even then, it's probably not going anywhere. My point is the price of an item forms part of the information being provided about the item and should be a consideration when deciding if the product has been accurately or inaccurately represented.
Again, that isn't the way it works, just the way I'd like it to work.
* - As above, I believe that the average consumer for a pair of headphones like this is not one who should be expected to be aware of how headphones are constructed or have a rich experience of audio reproduction to draw on.
Apple Beats headphones are total bullocks and utterly useless!
You want REAL HEADPHONES?
German Maestro sells FANTASTIC headphones ranging from DJ-style to
open and closed headphones which have sound quality levels that leave
Apple IN THE DUST !!! Designed and Made in Germany for 300 Euros
you can't beat the performance per Euro spent!
Try the GMP 400 and GMP 450 Pro headphones (which used to be MB Quart)
with a 14 Hz to 24200 Hz frequency range and THD (Total Harmonic Distortion)
of less than 0,06% that is TRULY PRO-LEVEL! I still have my 20 year old
version of the GMP 400 (i.e. the old MB Q400) and they are FAAAAR
better than ANYTHING Apple has today!
For users who need mobility and lightness, try the 3 CAN 116 Headphone
which have 6-to-26000 Hz and are only 133 grams which VERY HIGH QUALITY
gold plated 3,5 mm connectors!
Try them! I use them all the time and they can't be beat!
The Price is good too!
The "German Maestro" brand (used to be MB Quart) is top notch gear
at prices between 300 to 500 Euros.
But for the BEST OF THE BEST it's AKG and Sennheiser and some more esoteric gear
which gets into the 3000+ Euros! Sennheiser had some STUDIO REFERENCE headphones
a few years back that were in the range of 25000 Euros. YES! Twenty Five THOUSAND Euros!
The quality and sound reproduction specifications were WAY BEYOND the German Maestros!
And that Sennhesier series SOLD OUT ALL OF THEM! which means some very rich music
people had NO ISSUE with spending 25000 Euros on a set of headphone that weren't even
encrusted with diamonds and gold! Just PURE AND CLEAR SOUND REPRODUCTION
were the goals of that premium set of Sennheiser headphones.
These days a TOP QUALITY ULTRA HIGH END SET will run about 3000 to 5000 Euros
where the THD (Total Harmonic Distortion) levels are BELOW 0.01% and where the magnets
are extra strong Neodymiums and platinum or osmium plating and alloyed silver/gold contacts!
The thing about the Frequency Response numbers is not so much that that's where they stop working, it's a curve where performance degrades and then stops. A set of cans that advertises 20Hz to 20kHz will have a really weak bass response, unless you have 'em run through an amp, and the highs will likely be tinny and very quiet.
An expanded FR means that the sounds that you can hear will not be degraded.
Ironically, the high end audio systems supply house
I used to work for in my younger years did in fact
sell MB Quart headphones.
The owner was a complete gearhead who wanted
only the best-of-the-best! He actually TESTED
everything he sold with spectrograms, oscilloscopes,
and other very high end audio/video measurement gear.
That's why his company sold the MB Quart
headphone gear and when that division was
sold to German Maestro, the quality stayed
the same. Their headphones are by and far
waaaaaaay above the level of Apple Beats!
The bass response and high frequencies
rival the best speaker systems coming from
ULTRA high end speaker models such as
Rockport Arrakis, anything from Wilson,
and the more consumer oriented B&W,
Bang & Olufsen, etc.
I swear by the German Maestro because
I use them every day for computer audio/video
work and my coding work listening to 24-bit
192 KHz encoded audio....Sooooo I am
very willing to spend 300+ Euros on a
great set of headphones that have only
0.06% OR LESS of Harmonic Distortion!
That means the sound is Crystal Clear
with no colouration and no electrically
induced or circuit-based noise!
Most adults after age 30 can only hear well
from 5000 Hz to 15000 Hz so the sonic range
of the 14 Hz to 26000 Hz is a bit overkill
but I would rather have the sound quality
of the headphones like German Maestro!
So instead of wasting your money on
Apple Beats, spend just a little bit more
go for the much higher quality German
designed and made headphones.
It makes good business sense to
spend a bit more to get 10x the quality!
What the fuck could the headphones have done so badly that caused $5 million in damages?
That's easy. The breakdown is:
$200 refund because the product wasn't as advertised - $1,000 total as 5 claimants
$10,000 dollars each for the inconvenience of having to attend court, buy new headphones, etc. - $50,000 total
$800 each for the time explaining why they no longer use the headphones - i.e. they are stained with bodily fluids and the battery needs recharged after 4.3 seconds of use* - $4,000 total
$9,000 each - pay for the iPhone XI next year when it is launched, and headphones that are compatible with the faster than light connector that replaces the lightning connector - $45,000
$980,000 to help with treatment for PTSD caused by being seen with such crap Fanbois 'Fones'. - $4,900,000 total
What they should get is electroshock treatment for being mad to buy the headphones in the first place.
*Running time will vary depending on amount of use and how recharges were applied, including duration, initial charge level.....
I've had two pairs. I wanted Bluetooth, ear hanging, mic.
Beats 2 - worked for me. Particularly liked that the display on the iPhone would show me how much battery charge was left. I broke them (poor handling snapped an ear bud)
Beats 3 - poorer product IMO. Charging socket not protected. No charge indicator. I swear like a pig when I exercise... twice they have failed me. First time they seemed to dry out. Most recently they simply gurgled and died and seem to have decided to "rest".
I looked for replacements (bearing in mind the "requirement") but haven't found much else.
I don't get the staining thing. My complaint would be, "Definitely not sweat resistant". Cost per hour for the Beats 3 about $10 for the useable life
From your comments, I am guessing my earbuds are the powerbeats 2, as they have the covering over charging port, as well as the indicator. My review is in here, but I love mine and have ZERO complaints. I cannot speak to the v3 for either earbuds or studio, as it is clear now that I am a series 2 owner. thanks for your comments, House Rules
I have to say that, while I was initially skeptical, I had received an amazon gift card that allowed me to buy a set of the earbud powerbeats about 2yrs ago. since then I have worked out in them and run in them, including in a 5k race. In all event situations, I sweat like a pig and the earbuds were completely soaking, with no ill effects at all. Other than wiping them off and charging them, they have been the best ear buds I have ever had; for sound, build quality, and comfort on my ears. I liked them so much, in fact (and I am an audiophile of a sorts) that I bought the studio powerbeats with noise canceling, for listening to movies and music on planes and in the home. Another solid purchase.
So I am not sure if my experiences are singular and I lucked into the only good (2) powerbeats headsets out there, or we are talking about some type of unreal expectation, like swimming with them or abuse. From my end, they have gotten WELL used and sweat- covered and still performed to a very high standard.
I have been having problems with my beats exactly the same as the lawsuit seems to state, I have now sent my headphones into the sanctioned repairer(Singapore A-Lab) 4 times and they still only work for a month tops before the battery stops retaining a charge. I bought them to use while training for the NY marathon and despite being fixed a week before I flew to NY they broke 14k into the marathon. They are obviously cheap junk and are massively miss sold. Rant over- can anyone recommend decent, long lasting earphones which will actually last more than a few training runs. Are Bose any good or another overpriced piece of Junk.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019