14 ms·

$549!? That puts it in the same price category as: Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-1, Beyerdynamic DT1770/1990, Grado RS2e, among many many others. Honestly, I

$549!? That puts it in the same price category as: Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-1, Beyerdynamic DT1770/1990, Grado RS2e, among many many others. Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. At least airpods have a unique selling point in their portability and ux but I don't see how this benefits over-ear cans.

clolege 6y ago
Are there any other offerings for wireless spatial audio? That would be the main selling point for me.
- butterisgood 6y ago
  Airpods Pro were upgraded for spatial audio (firmware I guess), but they're earbuds.
- throwaway287391 6y ago
  I'm surprised spatial audio is a selling point for anyone on a product this expensive. Have you tried it? I have AirPods Pro and I spent £6 on a month of Disney+ just to try out the spatial audio feature when it came out (which already felt fairly ridiculous but what can I say, the HN comments were too enticing). I used it for 5 minutes, rotated my head around a bunch to maximize the effect, thought "hm, that's pretty neat" and then went on with my month never using it again. It really felt like a gimmick to me but I'm wondering if I'm missing something now...
  - clolege 6y ago
    Unfortunately, I haven't been able to try it out yet. I'm not particularly interested in the TV watching use case (I don't watch TV), but I think that there could be some cool AR use cases that I would love to play around with. Such as a Zombies Run sort of game where you could hear the zombies behind you, or approaching from other streets. Not sure if any such applications exist yet, though?
    - throwaway287391 6y ago
      Interesting, thanks -- I hadn't thought about using it for games but I could see how it might be more interesting for interactive stuff. I'm not sure if there are any iOS games that support it yet but presumably it's possible? (Didn't find anything with a quick search.)
  - Joeri 6y ago
    For me the biggest downside of spatial audio is that it's iphone or ipad only. You have to choose between a big sound or a big image, but you can't get both. If I had spatial audio on my imac, I would consider it a valuable feature. Now it's mostly a gimmick.
    - throwaway287391 6y ago
      Yeah, this is a large part of the reason I don't see myself using it much either -- if I'm at home watching video it's almost always on a TV screen. Also, I don't understand why it's still only supported by a couple streaming video services (none of which I personally use) -- Netflix already has Dolby surround audio in many of their videos, so shouldn't it be pretty easy to enable spatial audio in their iOS app? Well, clearly not, but I don't understand why.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
aphextron 6y ago
> Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. Because it's Apple. The same reason people pay the Apple premium for anything else. It's the brand, the aesthetic, the ecosystem, and the signaling.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > The same reason people pay the Apple premium for anything else. It's the brand, the aesthetic, the ecosystem, and the signaling. Apple is high quality. You're trying to make it sound cynical and flimsy, but it's not. It's consistent demonstrated high quality.
  - landryl 6y ago
    Just like the other brand cited in the original comment. He was pointing out what's different, and it's not the quality, it's the brand and ecosystem.
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      Those brands don't have the excellent Bluetooth connectivity. It's not the same quality.
    - fatbird 6y ago
      It's not "the brand", it's his experience with the brand: he has a demonstrated trust in it based on his history with it. If the alternative is a day spent comparison shopping and researching, then an overage of $200 is actually pretty reasonable, as opportunity costs go.
  - aphextron 6y ago
    >"Apple is high quality." Of course it is. But so is Sennheiser. People pay for the quality of Apple, but it's only part of the equation.
    - 6y ago
khalilravanna 6y ago
Assuming these compare in fidelity of sound, I think it’s a no brainer for a lot of people. Likely works seamlessly with apple products similar to other airpods and, unlike those other cans, doesn’t require a proper sound system or external amp to drive them. That being said, the fact that they stipulate they only work with apple products is a bit insane to me. I’ll stick with my wireless Sennheisers that I have to charge once a month thanks. EDIT: Here’s the bit about them being Apple only. Hopefully it changes. AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
- jb1991 6y ago
  > the fact that they stipulate they only work with apple products is a bit insane to me. If (and a big if, though also a possible if) they are truly exceptional and better than the competition, the desire to own these could funnel into buying more Apple products in general, so you can use them. Also, if they are that great, non-Apple users will find another reason to switch to Apple and it will boost the overall brand. So, not an unreasonable idea. But it is bold.
- akmarinov 6y ago
  Where does it say that they only work with Apple products?
  - khalilravanna 6y ago
    Wayyyy at the bottom: AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
    - akmarinov 6y ago
      Pretty sure that's the "if you want to use them with Apple devices, you need these versions". For example AirPods Pro require iOS 13.2 or older, but work fine via Bluetooth to all non-Apple hardware.
bitexploder 6y ago
How do we know they offer better sound? I’ll wait for some reviews. Apple doesn’t enter a product category like this lightly or without careful price setting analysis. This is almost exactly the reaction people had to AirPods when they were announced.
- bussierem 6y ago
  >Apple doesn't enter a product category like this [...] without careful price setting analysis https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand
  - bitexploder 6y ago
    You got me there, but that isn't a mass consumer product, either, so I think they are just charging whatever they feel like.
  - tfehring 6y ago
    I don't see how that's an exception at all - price sensitivity is presumably really low at that end of the market, and Apple priced accordingly. Who's realistically gonna pay $6,000 for a monitor and then buy an aftermarket stand to save $900?
- lookdangerous 6y ago
  I would love to read that thread
  - bitexploder 6y ago
    Use hn search (algolia)... I was just skimming it. People were super skeptical about the original AirPods. Then they tried them :)
- Terrario 6y ago
  But the airpods arent good headphones for their price range. They are successful because they are Apple, they offer a baseline quality for people who don’t know better and they offer status.
staz 6y ago
they sell wheels for $700...
- corobo 6y ago
  Bought by companies that know $700 to be a pretty short meeting. Don't mix up B2B and B2C to make a point haha. Different beasts. If you think that's expensive you should see some of the public sector deals
  - bussierem 6y ago
    https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand Pretty sure this wasn't B2B
    - jagger27 6y ago
      You keep posting this link in this thread. The pricing on the stand and wheels is the definition of B2B.
    - corobo 6y ago
      Aye pro usually means consumer and not pro
konschubert 6y ago
Unfortunately all of these competitor products don't have the W1 chip and are treated by iOS and MacOS as second-grade citizens. But at $600 after tax, I think a lot of people will decide to put up with that.
artembugara 6y ago
Why people buy MacBooks when there're Dell? Why iPhone when there're Huawei. Etc, etc. Because it is Apple. When your Audeze will break can you just pop up to the nearest Apple store to get support? Can you easily connect them to your iPhone, Mac, iPod?
cromka 6y ago
> offering better sound That's a bit presumptive. You don't know how these sound, yet. HD660S is based on 650S from the 2000s. Knowing Apple, they were able to innovate a bit here, so let's give them the benefit of the doubt. That having said, I also don't expect them to sound better than any of which you mentioned.
- cmiller1 6y ago
  Similarly I'm seeing several comments in this thread saying other companies offer better headphones for cheaper. We simply don't know how these perform yet.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
tester34 6y ago
haha, indeed. minimal wage in my country is around the price of those headphones :D
mmaunder 6y ago
These are not professional reference headphones. The goal isn’t predictable EQ for mixing music that will be played on a huge range of outputs. These are consumer headphones that provide wealth and status signaling for the wearer with enough audiophile “reasons” to pretend that is not the case.
- oblio 6y ago
  It's not only that. It's also peace of mind when you're not knowledgeable about the product category you're looking at. Most other big brands have frequent howlers: Google, Samsung, Sony, etc.
m12k 6y ago
> better sound Technically we don't know that yet. I mean, I'm not impressed with the price/value of e.g. Beats, so I'm not super hopeful, but I'll still withhold judgment until the reviews are in.
heroHACK17 6y ago
> Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. Have you tried them? How do they sound? Do you have a time machine that takes you to Dec. 15?
- jdxcode 6y ago
  Audiophiles say Apple fans only buy based on brand and he’s over here saying the headphones sound worse when nobody has even tried them.
- stef25 6y ago
  My defence would be that Apple isn't an audio company and although they're great at everything they do, I doubt they can catch up with Sennheiser, Grado, Audio Technica etc when it comes to pure audio quality. Where they're better is probably connectivity, noise cancellation (which is still garbage imho), integration with their hardware. Same with their Homepod - it was innovative not in absolute audio quality but in the way it was omnidirectional and could "fill a room" with sound (if I remember correctly, from having read a review) and connectivity. If you just want great audio for your vinyl, CD or Flac collection then you don't get a Homepod. $300 worth of HiFi gear would be better.
  - xvector 6y ago
    The development budget for the Max was in all certainty bigger than the development budget of the flagships from any of those companies, if not bigger than the companies themselves. I would not be surprised if Apple shatters the value of their headphones. Apple’s $9 DAC outperforms many “audiophile” DACs costing hundreds or even thousands of dollars.
tootie 6y ago
Completely expected for Apple. Look at the top of the mass market, copy their features, embed it in the iOS ecosystem, make the case white and silver, charge 25% premium.
elicash 6y ago
I HATE the standard Bluetooth experience. If reviews show choosing and switching devices is a better experience with these headphones, that’s worth paying something extra for.
- 310260 6y ago
  I agree with that in the case of something like the AirPods Pro but not necessarily for $549. Superb audio quality would have to be the main selling point at that price.
  - elicash 6y ago
    Yeah, I'm not sure HOW MUCH extra I'd pay for not having an aggravating experience when I start them up. I just know it's worth something extra. At minimum, this is a "wait for reviews" situation. I will say, I feel like wearing them while walking around is asking to be mugged. Like walking around with a stack of $100s on your head.
  - bdcravens 6y ago
    I think that's true of everything Apple puts out. It's consistently better by many standards, but often overpriced even then.
corobo 6y ago
I dunno if the price is worth it or if it's mostly Apple Magic Pricing TM but honestly having a virtual assistant on hand is pretty good for day to day use - I'd love that in an over-ear. Combine that with wireless and presumably Apple's headphone device switching ability and I'd be tempted if not broke > better sound at a cheaper price Oh nice you've tested them then? How's the sound for mainstream non-gold-plated ears?
- falcolas 6y ago
  Probably absurdly bass heavy with muddled mids, based on other Apple and beats headphones. So I’m sure the mainstream will love them.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
acqq 6y ago
Does anybody know if any product of "established professional audio companies" has built in "gyroscope and accelerometer" and can remap "the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves"? I guess some virtual reality headgear has something like that, but which audio headphones? And which audio headphones of "established professional audio companies" have four microphones built in and the chip with "10 audio cores" to adapt? Including one microphone directed to the ear, not to the outside. I guess some could have something close to that, but which? First to know if we compare apples and oranges, then to learn about the alternatives.
- bhandziuk 6y ago
  "the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves" What does this mean? I genuinely don't get it.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    If you play audio on your phone while wearing Airpods, and you turn your head, it still sounds as though the audio is coming from the direction of your phone.
    - acqq 6y ago
      Traditionally, it's not about the phone, the technology is meant to provide the effects one hears with the complicated 5+1 speakers and similar setups (typically today called "home cinema" etc), where you can "hear" the effect or the music appear from different directions (e.g. behind your back, right and in front of you left, or even the steps moving across the room). The effect can be heard when you're in the center position between many speakers and the content is produced for that. But, if you move your head while wearing the headphones (which should help you figure out where the sound comes from) the change that gives you the idea "where something is" won't be heard if the headphones aren't able to "know" that you moved your head at that moment and adjust the sounds accordingly. For adjustments, typically a lot of computation is needed. In VR or AR the same effect could give you a direction information of everything virtual around you. The virtual door on the right of you scratches, and as you approach it you hear the noises louder, as you turn your head, the noises are obviously from behind the virtual door... etc. Edit: to answer the "stereo" question: so it's about the audio mixed in more than 2 channels, or VR and the like effects.
skor 6y ago
Apple products are now "for the (wealthy) masses". Unfortunately they focus less on professional users. Beyerdynamic DT-1990 are great headphones btw but I don't think Ill see anyone walking around with that :)
gwbas1c 6y ago
If you only use Apple devices, the way they integrate with your mac / iphone is probably better. But, given that these only work with Apple devices... I'm going to be honest, I have a set of Beyerdynamic DT 770 pro's collecting dust right next to me as I type this. (I used to use them when I worked in an office.) I have some 3M "hearing protection" muffs that I bought for mowing the lawn, and they happen to have bluetooth headphones in them. They aren't as good as the DTs, but they are pretty darn close; and good enough that I prefer them when I travel to the DTs.
omega3 6y ago
It's the same question for 20 years.
tompccs 6y ago
$499!? That puts it in the same price category as: Palm Pilot, Blackberry Curve and Nokia N95, among many many others. Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional phone companies offering better phones at a cheaper price.
- jefftk 6y ago
  The iPhone was very different, and in many ways much better, than its competitors. I'm not seeing that here?
  - MisterPea 6y ago
    Better is subjective. It most likely doesn't have the audio fidelity as the headphones OP mentioned, but something like Transparency mode is such a great feature for me. The end product experience doesn't always correlate to existing metrics of quality.
  - squeaky-clean 6y ago
    Not a single one of the headphones mentioned by OP have bluetooth, noise canceling, or a built-in microphone.
    - Mehvix 6y ago
      That's because the ones mentioned are all audiophile headphones focused only on sound quality. There are plenty of headphones, notably the Sony wh1000xm3 for $230, which have bluetooth, noise canceling, and a built-in microphone plus they work with non-ios devices
      - Reason077 6y ago
        AirPods, including AirPods Max, support Bluetooth 5.0 and do work with non-Apple devices.
        6y ago
arbitrage 6y ago
Because their bluetooth implementation is garbage compared to apple's.
airstrike 6y ago
> That puts it in the same price category as: Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-1, Beyerdynamic DT1770/1990, Grado RS2e, among many many others. It looks like none of these are wireless, so I don't think the comparison is accurate.
- jojobas 6y ago
  Then there's Sony WH-1000XM4.
  - jayd16 6y ago
    You can pick up the WH-1000XMs for like $180 if you're patient though. $550 is pretty steep.
    - jojobas 6y ago
      Where did you find $550 and what's your $? They were released at US$350 in August and sell for less now.
      - jayd16 6y ago
        That's in comparison to these $550 ApplePods Max.
gdubs 6y ago
Apple has been very successful at leveraging a “complete the set” psychology among the faithful. When you’re happy with all of your other Apple gear, it’s easy to impute — to borrow a favorite Steve Jobs word — the level of quality you’re accustomed to onto a new product you’re unfamiliar with. Apple has ALWAYS operated at a premium margin, and appealed to users who want quality, but also don’t want to spend time comparison shopping laundry lists of features and components. These will appeal to people working from home, just in time for Christmas when people are willing to spend a little. With a pandemic raging, if you’re in the market for headphones you can’t exactly go out and try a bunch of pairs on. (Guitar Center is going bankrupt, if I recall.) So people will likely be happy to know there’s a product made by Apple that fills an additional niche — so they won’t have to give it much thought and will know that it’ll probably be of similar quality to what they’re used to with other Apple gear.
- hhjinks 6y ago
  It's scary to me how precisely this post describes me, and how I haven't even been cognisant of it.
cactus2093 6y ago
These are in a completely different category than pro audio headphones, they are wireless with active noise cancellation. As someone that owns a couple of the high end models you mention, and uses my Bose qc3 headphones every day, if you don’t get why that’s a difference all I can say is I highly recommend trying it. If you don’t want to pay $550, then get the Bose or Sony equivalents. All the audio quality in the world doesn’t do you much good walking down a noisy street, on a plane, or even sitting in a noisy open office. I’ll happily take pretty good sound + wireless and noise canceling over great sound in these environments. What I’m guessing Apple is trying to sell based on this price point is sound on the same level of the high end models you mention, with the convenience of wireless noise canceling, plus the (gimmick?) of spatial audio. I’m very curious to try them at some point to see if they deliver.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
eigenvalue 6y ago
Besides assuming that Apple can’t match those other (very small, likely undercapitalized) audio companies in terms of sounds quality— something I sort of doubt considering that Apple probably spent more in R&D on these than those companies have had in total cumulative revenues combined— it also assumes that it’s all about the sound quality. As someone who just ordered these, I wear noise canceling headphones (currently Bose QC from nearly 5 years ago) for several hours a day while I work, and I can tell you that I care much more about comfort and noise canceling performance. I just assume great sound since that has been available for decades now in decent headphones. I remember buying Grado SR80s back in 2002, and they sounded great. Unfortunately, they hurt my ears after 30 minutes and everyone around me could hear my music. Also, they had a thick, heavy cable. Sound quality isn’t everything. Considering that Apple just made Intel look like a bunch of fools despite Intel making more processors for longer than just about anyone, at this point it’s silly to be so skeptical of Apple when they introduce a product like this after years of effort.
- bsagdiyev 6y ago
  When Sennheiser is very small and/or undercapitalized and therefore must know nothing about audio... I really hope you’re either joking or just uninformed.
  - eigenvalue 6y ago
    That's true, I was more thinking of the smaller, boutique companies he mentioned. Sennheiser had $916mm in 2019 revenues. But consider that Apple is estimated to have close to $18b in total AirPods revenues in 2020. And my point isn't that they "must know nothing about audio," it is that they do not have some kind of monopoly on audio engineering. There is absolutely no reason why a company like Apple can't hire the very best people and give them insane amounts of resources to produce a better product. Also, it's important to remember that Sennheiser has dozens of products (I count 26 over-ear headphones alone on their website) and must spread R&D resources much thinner. Apple focuses all their energy and spend into just a couple of key products.
  - sib 6y ago
    By comparison to Apple, Sennheiser is both small and undercapitalized. And the more "boutique" suppliers are much more so. In Apple's fiscal 4th quarter alone: 4Q 2020 revenue: $64.7B 4Q 2020 capital returned to shareholders: $22B And for Apple's fiscal year: 2020 revenue: $274.5B 2020 R&D: $18.8B So Apple spent more than 19x Sennheiser's 2019 revenue in R&D this year.
tinco 6y ago
You mean the Bose Quiet Comfort and the Sony WH1000X category. None of the headphones you mention are relevant in any way.
lock-free 6y ago
I'm all for shitting on overpriced products but those you list aren't the same product category. Wireless noise cancelling headphones worth a damn are expensive. Not to mention, Apple is the only company making a headset where the mic doesn't suck and have trash fidelity when you need to speak and listen at the same time.
- zeptonaut22 6y ago
  I'd love to hear an Airpods Max mic test here. This is the only meaningful info I could find on its microphone: > With AirPods Max, voice calls and Siri commands are crisp and clear due to beam-forming microphones that block out ambient noise and focus on the user’s voice. Mic quality has become a much higher priority for me and I think others since starting to work from home. In my opinion, high-quality voice audio helps greatly improve the quality of conversations over VC.
  - lock-free 6y ago
    Part of this is Bluetooth's fault, but Apple has found a way not to kneecap their mics over bluetooth so I'm not sure why industry leading wireless audio (Shure, Sennheiser) that have put engineer years into low power, low latency, high fidelity wireless codecs can't make a headset that doesn't sound like Skype on DSL.
- jojobas 6y ago
  Sony WH-1000XM4.
sradman 6y ago
> $549!? ...I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. In addition to brand trust which other commenters describe, there is multi-device interoperability within the Apple ecosystem. Pairing with multiple devices is non-trivial and multi-device operation is not as seamless with non-AirPods hearables. This is about extending the AirPods user experience (UX) to an over-the-ears form factor. Bang-for-the-Buck consumers always struggle with Apple positioning. UX is almost always the intangible factor.
- Terrario 6y ago
  So you willing purchase products from a company that active shuns support of industry standards and third party integration in order to lock their customers to their proprietary ecosystem and then see this reduction in options as a value?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
hlava 6y ago
They must have some marketing strategy already prepared. Similar to that of Beats by Dre. Just make it popular trough popular culture (movies, music videoclips, interview with Hans Zimmer wearing these) and the kids will persuade their parents that they just need to have it. Thats how the bandwagon picks up speed.
MLpractitioner 6y ago
I can imagine companies buying these for employees
45ure 6y ago
>$549!? At this price, it is a luxury that can wait until AirPods Max 2, as I have already upgraded to XM4/Buds+/Jabra 75t this year for work and pleasure. However, at first glance, some integrated design aesthetics will provide the necessary appeal for dedicated fans e.g. the digital crown, colour scheme etc. It would be interesting to see the real world tests, and for starters, I would settle for a mini review by tubers like MKBHD.
ookblah 6y ago
great for those others now lol, apple effect... everyone can raise their prices now with no guilt
hbbio 6y ago
We are interested in the same audio gear. But they have CABLES! Most people I know would rather want a headset without any and I suppose that wireless devices come with an array of software problems that Apple can fix better than the others (just supposing, I don't own wireless speakers myself).
jpablo 6y ago
My main gripe with paying $550 for headphones is, they still revert to 90s landline quality when using the microphone?
- edude03 6y ago
  yeah, why is that?
  - umanwizard 6y ago
    Because the Bluetooth profiles that allow two-way audio streaming (HFP and HSP) define a lower audio bandwidth. Your Bluetooth headset is probably switching from A2DP to HFP or HSP when you start a call.
m3kw9 6y ago
How do people say stuff like this before they even saw a single review or even hear it?
new_realist 6y ago
How do you know competitors offer better sound at a cheaper price? Do you own these?
m3kw9 6y ago
Because the best headphones are the ones you use the most. You won’t need a portable amp to make the sound better. This is the same analogy on how the best camera is the one you have on you, and the iPhone camera does not suck. I have a set of grados and I use them so little because of inconvenience. Instead is the AirPod pros that’s with me and use 95% of the time
hated 6y ago
Perhaps because when you walk into the Apple store for headphones you won't find the other brands there and these shoppers are only interested in Apple blessed products.
Technically 6y ago
Frankly, I probably can't hear the difference and the reason I'd pay is for a decent interface.
zepto 6y ago
What makes you think the sound is better? There is a good chance these are competitive in terms of sound quality at their price point.
redm 6y ago
“when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price” Have you tested these?
tlholaday 6y ago
> ... why you would buy these ... Feature-terms: For the microphones. Benefit-terms: For comfortable all-day telephony, up to 20 hours between charges.
golergka 6y ago
The core 5% of their audience would just buy what they know rather then spend their time researching the market they don't know and don't have any interest in. Spending that time and attention on research would be much more expensive to them than the cost of the headphones. And the 95% really want to signal others that their time is as expensive as of those 5%.
anonu 6y ago
Pricing a product is always a very hard thing. I speak from experience working at a startup and trying to understand what price the market will bear. The beauty with Apple is they build beautiful products that people covet. They effectively create a new market and force people to re-assess what they would pay for XYZ feature. I am sure the average user would never dream of spending $500+ for a pair of headphones yesterday. Now the landscape is all different. Its the same for the iPhone. Why do these things costs $1000? I can get most of the same features in just as nice a package with many Android phones. But still iPhone is the dominant winner in the US market.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  Brand new iPhone SE is $400. Entry level iPhones have never cost more than ~$650. The entry level specs are good enough for 80% of people’s needs, and an extra $100 or $200 probably satisfies 95% of people’s needs. I don’t see the purpose of the “$1k iPhone” meme when it’s blatantly false, and competing Android phones have also always cost around the same amount. And what’s also been blatantly true is the amortized cost of an iPhone over its longer lifespan versus competing products has always been lower.
  - rafram 6y ago
    The iPhone 8/X generation turned a lot of people off because of its totally unaffordable pricing. The 8, which took the entry-level spot but was essentially a previous-model phone, cost $700, and the X was $1k. They’ve made this mistake before. The only possible saving grace that I can see is that it’s an image strategy: price a product very high in the first generation to build an “exclusive” image, then lower its price over time to increase sales.
kelp 6y ago
When Apple releases a new product and it’s not understood why people would buy it, I’m always reminded of this quote from former Palm CEO Ed Colligan when the iPhone was launched: “We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” Since then I’ve not wanted to bet against Apple. The reason people will buy these is because they are part of the Apple ecosystem. I have no knowledge of this, but I’m sure their out of the box pairing experience will be much like other Apple products. Hold your phone near it and it just connects. Far more seamless than most Bluetooth pairing. Any audio controls are built into your phone. And typically Apple has hardware and software designed to work together. They’ve done this with the iPhone camera to completely disrupt the digital camera industry. It’s the ecosystem plus the benefits of hardware / software integration.
- ubermonkey 6y ago
  Yeah, that's a big part of it. I've had BT headphones before my Airpods, and I really kinda hated them all. They were just clunky and awkward to use. Airpods changed my expectation around that kind of listening. The competition for a $549 Apple over-ear ANC headphone is, realistically, $300-$400 over-ear ANC headphones from everyone else. Because user experience and usability matter a LOT; I'd definitely pay a premium to avoid all the goofy crap that goes with "regular" Bluetooth.
- jayd16 6y ago
  >Since then I’ve not wanted to bet against Apple. Counterpoint, we're not all buying $1000 monitor stands and $700 caster wheels. Sometimes Apple is just gouging.
  - kelp 6y ago
    Yeah, those are pretty crazy. However, that whole product line is clearly not intended for normal consumers. It’s for video editing, where most products are insanely expensive and that $1000 monitor stand is lost in the noise of all the other production costs.
ubermonkey 6y ago
That kind of knee-jerk rejection is just as weird as a knee-jerk promise to buy. All we know right now is that Apple has introduced wireless, ANC, over-ear headphones at a premium price. If I were looking to spend that kind of money on headphones -- which, we should be clear, isn't that hard to do if you're serious about it -- I'd absolutely listen to these. Given Apple's general approach to usability and quality, it'd be insanely foolish to dismiss them without trying them. >Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. This is what I'm talking about. How do you KNOW that $other_headphones sound better? The Apple model isn't even available yet. I mean, it's dead solid clear that Apple's making a big move here. It could fail. But they tend not to fail. If they're pricing these on par with serious high-end over-ear headphones, then they expect them to be able to compete with those high-end headphones on all the points people care about in that market. & about that: Your counterexamples aren't in Apple's target market here at all. None of them are wireless, and none of them include noise cancellation. Moreover, the Audeze are open backed, which (for the non headphone nerds still reading) means those around you can hear what you're listening to. You get great sound that way -- lots of folks would argue that the best sounding phones in the world are all open-backed -- but it means they're terrible choices for most modern headphone applications, like in a public place or open office. I love me some Grados, but they have the same problem. Apple's play here is against the high end wireless, ANC product in the market, not these audiophile-only options you mention. I have a $300 pair of ANC wireless Sennheisers that I typically used on planes (ha, ha; remember travel?) or in other contexts where I really needed isolation. They're clunky to use and have weird idiosyncrasies, but they do sound better than my Airpods Pro, and they work better for long flights. If they broke, would I consider the new Maxes? Absolutely.
- ransom_rs 6y ago
  > This is what I'm talking about. How do you KNOW that $other_headphones sound better? The Apple model isn't even available yet. I feel this part of the discussion is missing. A lot of people seem to love the HomePod for it's great audio quality at the price, and I have heard similar things for the HomePod Mini. Apple seems to be getting decent at making high quality audio equipment(per $), I feel like the quality of these headphones could be similar to the competition. Apple for sure has a history of overcharging for certain products (remember, you can get a monitor stand for $1k), but the M1 Macbook Air is probably the best $1,000 computer by a long shot.
apohn 6y ago
>Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. Probably because most of these companies have been "upgrading" their headphones for years, but really just making tweaks and increasing the price. So much of it is just marketing. I'm a former headphone addict who used to own a lot of expensive headphones. I saw the progression from when $300 was expensive (if you exclude the electrostatics), to suddenly $1k is the norm for a "High End" headphone. Then $1.5K, then $2000, etc. I'm not planning to buy the Airpods Max, but I give kudos to Apple for finally stepping up with computational audio and doing more than just making minor tweaks and marketing the hell out of it. Apple might actually push the other manufacturers to get off their ass and do some actual innovation.
alkonaut 6y ago
If I wanted $4-$600 over-ear headphones to go with an iPhone where phone calls and general phone integrations are an important part, then I'd seriously consider these. Otherwise not. As you say, as far as headphones go you can get better for less. But if seen as a phone headset that also has some hi fi qualities, then it makes more sense to go with the ones from Apple. I trust Apple to make that 100% integration with my iPhone whereas I don't necessarily trust Sennheiser to. The third party ones will turn out to drop calls more frequently in iOS 15 or something similar. That's the kind of issue you are paying to avoid.
tfehring 6y ago
It’s ludicrous but I’m still tempted. It seems like they uniquely offer the best UX in headphones since unlike AirPods you don’t have to intermittently take them off to charge them if you’re using them all day. “The best UX” is assuming you’ve bought into the rest of the Apple ecosystem, of course.
Eric_WVGG 6y ago
oh, you've heard them already? What do you think of the cups and the band, are they comfortable? What do you think of the crown control?
sombrero_guitar 6y ago
The Airpods Max is more comparable to something like Sony WH-1000XM4, Bose 700, or B&O Beoplay H9. You can't really compare wired openback headphones to headphones that are meant to be worn in public on the go. However, even among the wireless headphones with active noise canceling, the Airpods Max are more expensive than their competition. The closest in terms of features and price is the Beoplay H9 and that is $50-100 cheaper depending on where you buy it. To many people the extra integration with Apple products is worth paying the difference. For other people, especially those not all in on the Apple ecosystem, the cheaper competitors are a better option. However, comparing it to products in a different class is not a very good argument.
- sorum 6y ago
  Considering how many hours per day/week most of us spend with our headphones and how many years they last, I think the price difference is marginal over its lifespan. My Bose QC35s are almost 4 years old. My initial thought was to upgrade to the Bose 700 ($340), but the Airpods Max are $210 more expensive. If I assume 3 years before my next upgrade, this equates to $6 more per month. The in-ear segment was a slam dunk for the AirPods Pro - no exciting options competing there (Sennheiser's True Wireless were a huge disappointment). In the wireless over-ear segment on the other hand, it is very competitive and there are great options. The H1 chip isn't that much of a leg up, compared to how well Sony, Bose and the others handle connectivity to multiple devices. It'll boil down to the basics for me: audio quality and noise cancellation - if Apple can nail those, the price increase would be worth it in my book.
thanksforthe42 6y ago
It's a marketing tactic. The goal is to be unaffordable, this way people create goals to buy it and show off to their friends. This has been Apple's marketing since the 2000s. The product quality is secondary to the price. Even the users don't want everyone to afford it. They want to be seen as unique.
- throw_m239339 6y ago
  Well it depends. Once in a while Apple makes very good products for its price (like the latest Macbook Air, the iphone 3GS back then, and a few Macbooks in early the 2010's compared to the competition) and yes for the rest it's all about beign a luxury brand, absolutely.
  - cromka 6y ago
    Also entry-level iPads, the iPhone SE. The regular AirPods. All very good and very affordable products.
    - thanksforthe42 6y ago
      This is so out of touch. Check your privilege.
      - cromka 6y ago
        $300 for an iPad is too much, where no other device can come close in functionality or price? Same with $400 for an iPhone SE? You're being obtuse, read into the context of this conversation.
        thanksforthe42 6y ago
        Obtuse? Projecting Let me play you a sad song- There once was a poor minority boy who had bad parents through no fault of their own. They wanted to become a programmer, they got a $100 Android and started working on an app. Upon finishing they publish their app for a one time 25$ fee. But that only reached half the market. So next the boy bought a $1000 mac, a $400 iphone, and a $125/yr app store subscription. Lol
dkonofalski 6y ago
>offering better sound at a cheaper price This is what drives me nuts about stuff like this. How can you even say that? There's no way that you've tried these headphones so how can you possibly say that? Apple has gotten rave reviews with regard to audio quality in the Airpods Pro and the Homepod and Homepod Mini so why wouldn't they take that expertise and put it into these?
- colinmhayes 6y ago
  Apple has absolutely not gotten rave reviews on airpod pro sound quality. In fact that's that biggest complaint, they sound the same as normal airpods. I own airpod pros. They're great for what they are, noise cancelling true wireless that interact very well with apple products. But the sound quality leaves quite a bit to be desired.
  - dkonofalski 6y ago
    Umm...what? Yes they do. They've been compared against the best over-ear headphones, especially noise-cancelling headphones. https://www.whathifi.com/us/reviews/apple-airpods-pro https://www.whathifi.com/us/reviews/apple-airpods-pro On top of that, going off of what that review mentions, the AirPods Max look to solve exactly that problem and compete with exactly that range of product.
ecf 6y ago
Paying an extra $200 for the H1 chip to be able to avoid professional audio companies and and their absolutely incompetent Bluetooth implementations is money well spent.
martinp 6y ago
I would at least consider them at $550, but in the Norwegian Apple Store they are $800. Even including 25% VAT, it's another $130 on top of that. Apple's region-adjusted prices are insane.
yk 6y ago
Apples customers don't know that. The entire strategy of Apple is, selling to people who compare a EUR 1500 MacBook to a EUR 500 HP laptop. Of course the MacBook is a lot better. Similar, these need to be a lot better than AirPods. They will be, and they will sell.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
briandear 6y ago
How do you know they offer “better sound at a cheaper price?” Did you listen to these yet?
pwinnski 6y ago
I'm happy with my AirPods Pro, so I won't be buying these. That said, looking beyond audio quality alone is why these exists. None of those headphones has the ease-of-syncing these will. I'm pretty sure none of those headphones support the spatial audio stuff these will. My corded Sennheiser HD280s started flaking off around the ear not too long after I bought them, while these seem like probably they'll wear better over time. Audio quality? Yeah, I'm guessing Apple's aiming for "good enough for most people," nowhere near studio quality. But on everything else, I suspect they've nailed it, especially for people who've used AirPods or AirPods Pro and appreciate the syncing, spatial audio, etc.
darthrupert 6y ago
And significantly cheaper than, say, Sennheiser HD820 or the Focal Stellia. We cannot know whether the price is crazy before somebody has reviewed them. I'm sure we don't need to wait for long. If it's an amazing experience, it might be a good deal. I know I would pay huge amounts of money at this stage of my life for a great experience. Like a hundred euros for a single glass of whiskey. Or hundreds of euros for a great meal. And headphones (even battery powered ones) last a whole lot longer than a shot of whiskey or a meal. But. They're wireless, and Bluetooth 5.0. They will be Bluetooth 5.0 in 5 years, and possibly obsolete because of that. Passive headphones bought today will be just as good in 5 years, unless something weird happens in speaker technology by then.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
hindsightbias 6y ago
I'll predict AirPods Max will gross more income for Apple in 2021 than all those brands high-end gear combined.
bstar77 6y ago
While I agree that sound quality is likely much better with those headphones you listed, they all require an external dac/amp to realize that quality. For high end, wireless, noise cancelling headphones, this might be appropriately priced.
Dwolb 6y ago
Does everyone here realize how incredibly huge Apple's audio business is? Their Wearables, Home, and Accessories business did $30B last year. If AirPods are even 1/5th of that category, that's a $36 business. For comparison, Sennheiser did about $1B in revenue and Bose did $3.6B. Are are absolutely huge and capable of surpassing every single company in terms of product and audio quality.
temporallobe 6y ago
For the record, the best headphones in the world are the Sony MDR-7506s, which sell for less than $100 in the US. These are well-known in the audio production and musician world and are prized for their accuracy, frequency response, comfort, and output. I’ve tried plenty of other high-end cans including a few $1000+ audiophile-realm models but just didn’t connect with any of them. In fact, I’ve owned many pairs over the past 2 decades and I just keep buying these when the get too tattered. I still have my first pair and they still sound as good as the day I bought them.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
rootusrootus 6y ago
Apple has made excellent headphones in the past, and at a competitive price point. For a long time their IEMs were a strongly recommended option for people who wanted excellent headphones at a pretty reasonable price. It's entirely possible that these headphones will also be competitive with headphones from other established companies that sell for a higher price. This is the same company that just brought us the M1, so we know they have hired plenty of engineering talent.
- texasbigdata 6y ago
  You can’t beat 8 drivers in one ear producing different frequency ranges in a custom sized devices made from a mould impression taken by an audiologist with 1 single cone. Sorry but no engineering talent can break the laws of physics. But agree they should make a great product overall regardless.
  - cromka 6y ago
    > You can’t beat 8 drivers in one ear producing different frequency ranges in a custom sized devices made from a mould impression taken by an audiologist with 1 single cone And you can get these for $549, too?
    - texasbigdata 6y ago
      Fair but you can get 3ish at 499 excluding the imprint
CyanLite2 6y ago
This will be the new trendy way to do Zoom calls.
JoshTko 6y ago
Easy, I want all the features in Airpods but with better sound.
apetrovic 6y ago
I don't plan to buy it (I have Air Pods Pro and Bose QC35 II and they works well), but if I'm on the market for NC headphones, I would probably pay premium for Apple's, if reviews doesn't find any glaring shortcomings. Why? Because of the small things - switching between active devices on AirPods works very well for me (today I received a phone call by telling my iphone to switch to AirPods even if they're attached to my laptop), automatic detection of the right ear, head tracking (these spatial sound demos sounds amazing and I hope more applications will support it). These things means more to my average and aging ears than some flashy audiophile names.
ogre_codes 6y ago
> Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-1 These are wired headphones that lack ANC. Haven't listened to them, but just looking at the features it's pretty obvious these aren't for the same people. Apple's cans are Wireless high quality headphones with Active Noise Cancellation, transparency mode, and seamless switching. The only thing they have in common with the ones you listed is "Headphones". This is all setting aside the fact that you are prejudging audio quality of a product nobody has reviewed. I suspect there are a ton of people like me who are just fine with good sound and very interested in getting wireless noise cancelling headphones.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
yalogin 6y ago
I don't understand the higher end audio space and may be that's why, I don't quite understand your statement. What makes these other companies good at audio that Apple cannot match? They are a huge company that have been making audio products for a really long time and (no matter what one thinks of them) they own Beats too. So I actually say, if Sennheiser and others can do it Apple can do it better, not just because of their approach but also because of their SW/HW integration story.
simias 6y ago
It might be a bit of a hot take but from my point of view audio is mostly a solved problem. It's not like video where we still have trade-offs in terms of quality due to the huge bandwidth and processing involved for very high resolutions as well as the difficulty of reproducing very high dynamic ranges and framerates. None of this is relevant for audio. Despite what some audiocultists would have you believe CD quality is basically as good as it gets, you cover effectively 100% of the (normal) human hearing range, both in frequency range and dynamics. Ok, ok, technically not 100% of the dynamics, but few people care to listen to "distant ventilator on a quiet night" followed by "Airbus A380 taking off from the point of view of the jet turbine". Of course the quality of reproduction matters a lot, playing a CD through cheap $5 earphones is not going to sound great. But even there the cost of decent quality electronics keeps dropping and dropping. You can get a good quality DAC for a trivial amount of money (and stand alone DACs are still usually overpriced because they're for the niche/enthusiast/pro market, everybody else uses whatever their smartphones/laptop/desktop has integrated). Buying ultra high-end, ultra-expensive "audiophile" equipment these days is effectively like buying mechanical watches. It's because you like the luxury and craftsmanship, or you're making a fashion statement. Apple knows that, hence these AirPods. If you're about function over form you'd sooner get a cheapo Casio quartz watch. And there's nothing wrong with that, it just annoys me when audiophiles try to justify their fashion statements with pseudo-science.
- TimTheTinker 6y ago
  “spatial audio” is the killer feature here. It’s one of the last “unsolved” audio problems (at least in available headphone/earphone product lines), along with the upper frequency limit on noise canceling, which this product doesn’t solve.
  - shortandsweet 6y ago
    Killer feature huh? Why have I never heard of it before this post.
    - TimTheTinker 6y ago
fastball 6y ago
Have you tried these headphones? How do you know others are providing better sound at a cheaper price?
egsmi 6y ago
> established professional audio companies offering better sound Didn’t these just come out? How do you know the other offering have better sound?
reaperducer 6y ago
when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. I won't argue about the price. But considering that exactly zero HN commenters have tried these, how can you categorically state that the audio is bad? People used spec sheets to make the same assumptions about each iteration of AirPods and were wrong each time.
Reason077 6y ago
> "$549!?" Sony WH-1000XM4s will set you back $350 and these are favourite NC headphones for many. The AirPods Max have some clear advantages over those: 9 microphones, huge suite of positioning sensors including gyroscope and accelerometer etc. Presumably the sound quality and NC will be at least as good as Sony's, and the software, UX and "build quality" significantly better.
- thefourthchime 6y ago
  Yep, this is exactly what I expect. I also expect they'll cost $350 by next Black Friday and force the rest of the industry to copy the build quality and some features.
- strogonoff 6y ago
  I’m finicky about audio quality, still I favour Apple products generally. I was willing to give Apple a chance last year and got AirPods Pro, but they proved abysmal in terms of everything—comfort for wearing long term, isolation, sound quality, going out of sync with each other, and a while ago one of them started to emit loud noise randomly. It’s likely that some of those issues are related to my unit and individual fit, but I’m back to Shure SE215/SE425 and their black foam tips (which achieve very similar overall attenuation without active NC[0]) as my go-to in-ear headphones. For over-the-ears I have fairly old (and virtually unbreakable) Sony WH-1000XM3; when their battery goes I would love to give Apple another chance but the price tag makes it hard to justify. IMO to any audiophile/sound engineer familiar with the brands mentioned by eertami the price of Apple’s new AirPods would indeed appear outlandish. [0] Measurably so: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/apple/airpods-pro-truly-wireless#comparison_348 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/apple/airpods-pro-... vs. https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/shure/se215#comparison_348 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/shure/se215#compar...
  - Reason077 6y ago
    I have the XM3s too. I agree about their indestructibility (they're the only headphones I've owned in years that haven't broken within a year or so!), but mine have developed an annoying hissing sound in one ear when noise cancelling is on. They also have that "plasticky" feel and annoyingly "creak" in the headband when they move around. The comfort is unmatched, however, and battery life is still fantastic on them despite very heavy use. Not sure I can imagine that battery ever dying! I've been toying with the idea of buying XM4s but I'm tempted by Apple's. I guess I'll give them a try and can always return them if the comfort etc isn't as good as Sony's.
jasonlotito 6y ago
> audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. It's not just sound though, right? Can you point me to an offering that offers the same features that Apple is offering here? Wireless, with a high battery life, automatic switching, Siri, noise cancellation, spatial mode, etc. > At least airpods have a unique selling point in their portability and ux but I don't see how this benefits over-ear cans. I don't see why portability and a good UX are somehow not needed for over-ear headphones.
asdffdsa 6y ago
Did you see the notes? - adaptive EQ - noise cancelling - transparent-mode - 3D spatial awareness If Apple nails those, then it's worth the money in my book.
wetpaws 6y ago
Pretty sure quite a lot of people will buy it _because_ of the price, not despite it.
paulpan 6y ago
For every value product (e.g. the SE lineup), Apple puts out an outrageously priced one like this. Much like the $129 wireless charger (cable sold separately),it's intended for die-hard fans. Apple user demographic is across the entire economic spectrum so I'm sure that 1) this will sell well and 2) it's a great pair of headphones. Worth pointing out that this doesn't have any auxiliary ports so you can't use it on airplanes, etc...unless there's an upcoming lightning-to-aux adapter. It feels like a culmination of the "no headphone jack" vision started with the iPhone 7.
novok 6y ago
My other disappointment is how they didn't use this to improve bluetooth too. They could of used this to add a new set of proprietary bluetooth protocols to improve the audio quality of voice calls and general listening. BT microphone + headphone streaming is fairly high latency and low fidelity. Same with general audio. Could of called it Apple Bluetooth HD or something similar. Missed opportunity.
romanovcode 6y ago
These ones have microphone.
samatman 6y ago
You're assuming they'll sound worse. I don't consider that a safe assumption. Apple is an established professional audio company. Macs are the computer used in production and DJing, have been for decades. They take sound seriously, and when Apple says less than 1% distortion across the entire audible range, well. They could be lying, but I wouldn't bet money on that.
floatingatoll 6y ago
I don't trust any of those companies to deliver Bluetooth headphones that use best-in-class audio protocols to prioritize audio quality over compatibility. I expect them to outsource a Bluetooth chip that can't negotiate AAC over the air, because they weren't willing to pay the chip cost or licensing fee. I expect them to be unable to easily pair with five separate devices (including Windows 10) and transition between them rapidly. I expect them to cheapen their audio experience when they go wireless. If Apple's new thing was wired only, I wouldn't even consider them. I already have my custom balanced-XLR Beyerdynamics on a pile of Schiit on my office desk. They serve that purpose beautifully, and I see no reason to change that. The DT1770s that you compare them to are not wireless. They're not in the same market at all as Apple's wireless products. Of the manufacturers you list, I trust none of them to meet wireless needs. I trust Apple to meet wireless needs as much as I trust Beyerdynamic to meet wired needs.
whiddershins 6y ago
Do you know for a fact those companies are providing better sound? I’m not saying you are wrong, I would just like to know if this is based on something specific.

clolege 6y ago

Are there any other offerings for wireless spatial audio? That would be the main selling point for me.

butterisgood 6y ago
Airpods Pro were upgraded for spatial audio (firmware I guess), but they're earbuds.
throwaway287391 6y ago
I'm surprised spatial audio is a selling point for anyone on a product this expensive. Have you tried it? I have AirPods Pro and I spent £6 on a month of Disney+ just to try out the spatial audio feature when it came out (which already felt fairly ridiculous but what can I say, the HN comments were too enticing). I used it for 5 minutes, rotated my head around a bunch to maximize the effect, thought "hm, that's pretty neat" and then went on with my month never using it again. It really felt like a gimmick to me but I'm wondering if I'm missing something now...
- clolege 6y ago
  Unfortunately, I haven't been able to try it out yet. I'm not particularly interested in the TV watching use case (I don't watch TV), but I think that there could be some cool AR use cases that I would love to play around with. Such as a Zombies Run sort of game where you could hear the zombies behind you, or approaching from other streets. Not sure if any such applications exist yet, though?
  - throwaway287391 6y ago
    Interesting, thanks -- I hadn't thought about using it for games but I could see how it might be more interesting for interactive stuff. I'm not sure if there are any iOS games that support it yet but presumably it's possible? (Didn't find anything with a quick search.)
- Joeri 6y ago
  For me the biggest downside of spatial audio is that it's iphone or ipad only. You have to choose between a big sound or a big image, but you can't get both. If I had spatial audio on my imac, I would consider it a valuable feature. Now it's mostly a gimmick.
  - throwaway287391 6y ago
    Yeah, this is a large part of the reason I don't see myself using it much either -- if I'm at home watching video it's almost always on a TV screen. Also, I don't understand why it's still only supported by a couple streaming video services (none of which I personally use) -- Netflix already has Dolby surround audio in many of their videos, so shouldn't it be pretty easy to enable spatial audio in their iOS app? Well, clearly not, but I don't understand why.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

aphextron 6y ago

> Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. Because it's Apple. The same reason people pay the Apple premium for anything else. It's the brand, the aesthetic, the ecosystem, and the signaling.

chrisseaton 6y ago
> The same reason people pay the Apple premium for anything else. It's the brand, the aesthetic, the ecosystem, and the signaling. Apple is high quality. You're trying to make it sound cynical and flimsy, but it's not. It's consistent demonstrated high quality.
- landryl 6y ago
  Just like the other brand cited in the original comment. He was pointing out what's different, and it's not the quality, it's the brand and ecosystem.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    Those brands don't have the excellent Bluetooth connectivity. It's not the same quality.
  - fatbird 6y ago
    It's not "the brand", it's his experience with the brand: he has a demonstrated trust in it based on his history with it. If the alternative is a day spent comparison shopping and researching, then an overage of $200 is actually pretty reasonable, as opportunity costs go.
- aphextron 6y ago
  >"Apple is high quality." Of course it is. But so is Sennheiser. People pay for the quality of Apple, but it's only part of the equation.
  - 6y ago

khalilravanna 6y ago

Assuming these compare in fidelity of sound, I think it’s a no brainer for a lot of people. Likely works seamlessly with apple products similar to other airpods and, unlike those other cans, doesn’t require a proper sound system or external amp to drive them. That being said, the fact that they stipulate they only work with apple products is a bit insane to me. I’ll stick with my wireless Sennheisers that I have to charge once a month thanks. EDIT: Here’s the bit about them being Apple only. Hopefully it changes. AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.

jb1991 6y ago
> the fact that they stipulate they only work with apple products is a bit insane to me. If (and a big if, though also a possible if) they are truly exceptional and better than the competition, the desire to own these could funnel into buying more Apple products in general, so you can use them. Also, if they are that great, non-Apple users will find another reason to switch to Apple and it will boost the overall brand. So, not an unreasonable idea. But it is bold.
akmarinov 6y ago
Where does it say that they only work with Apple products?
- khalilravanna 6y ago
  Wayyyy at the bottom: AirPods Max require Apple devices running iOS 14.3 or later, iPadOS 14.3 or later, macOS Big Sur 11.1 or later, watchOS 7.2 or later, or tvOS 14.3 or later.
  - akmarinov 6y ago
    Pretty sure that's the "if you want to use them with Apple devices, you need these versions". For example AirPods Pro require iOS 13.2 or older, but work fine via Bluetooth to all non-Apple hardware.

bitexploder 6y ago

How do we know they offer better sound? I’ll wait for some reviews. Apple doesn’t enter a product category like this lightly or without careful price setting analysis. This is almost exactly the reaction people had to AirPods when they were announced.

bussierem 6y ago
>Apple doesn't enter a product category like this [...] without careful price setting analysis https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand
- bitexploder 6y ago
  You got me there, but that isn't a mass consumer product, either, so I think they are just charging whatever they feel like.
- tfehring 6y ago
  I don't see how that's an exception at all - price sensitivity is presumably really low at that end of the market, and Apple priced accordingly. Who's realistically gonna pay $6,000 for a monitor and then buy an aftermarket stand to save $900?
lookdangerous 6y ago
I would love to read that thread
- bitexploder 6y ago
  Use hn search (algolia)... I was just skimming it. People were super skeptical about the original AirPods. Then they tried them :)
Terrario 6y ago
But the airpods arent good headphones for their price range. They are successful because they are Apple, they offer a baseline quality for people who don’t know better and they offer status.

staz 6y ago

they sell wheels for $700...

corobo 6y ago
Bought by companies that know $700 to be a pretty short meeting. Don't mix up B2B and B2C to make a point haha. Different beasts. If you think that's expensive you should see some of the public sector deals
- bussierem 6y ago
  https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand Pretty sure this wasn't B2B
  - jagger27 6y ago
    You keep posting this link in this thread. The pricing on the stand and wheels is the definition of B2B.
  - corobo 6y ago
    Aye pro usually means consumer and not pro

konschubert 6y ago

Unfortunately all of these competitor products don't have the W1 chip and are treated by iOS and MacOS as second-grade citizens. But at $600 after tax, I think a lot of people will decide to put up with that.

artembugara 6y ago

Why people buy MacBooks when there're Dell? Why iPhone when there're Huawei. Etc, etc. Because it is Apple. When your Audeze will break can you just pop up to the nearest Apple store to get support? Can you easily connect them to your iPhone, Mac, iPod?

cromka 6y ago

> offering better sound That's a bit presumptive. You don't know how these sound, yet. HD660S is based on 650S from the 2000s. Knowing Apple, they were able to innovate a bit here, so let's give them the benefit of the doubt. That having said, I also don't expect them to sound better than any of which you mentioned.

cmiller1 6y ago
Similarly I'm seeing several comments in this thread saying other companies offer better headphones for cheaper. We simply don't know how these perform yet.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

tester34 6y ago

haha, indeed. minimal wage in my country is around the price of those headphones :D

mmaunder 6y ago

These are not professional reference headphones. The goal isn’t predictable EQ for mixing music that will be played on a huge range of outputs. These are consumer headphones that provide wealth and status signaling for the wearer with enough audiophile “reasons” to pretend that is not the case.

oblio 6y ago
It's not only that. It's also peace of mind when you're not knowledgeable about the product category you're looking at. Most other big brands have frequent howlers: Google, Samsung, Sony, etc.

m12k 6y ago

> better sound Technically we don't know that yet. I mean, I'm not impressed with the price/value of e.g. Beats, so I'm not super hopeful, but I'll still withhold judgment until the reviews are in.

heroHACK17 6y ago

> Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. Have you tried them? How do they sound? Do you have a time machine that takes you to Dec. 15?

jdxcode 6y ago
Audiophiles say Apple fans only buy based on brand and he’s over here saying the headphones sound worse when nobody has even tried them.
stef25 6y ago
My defence would be that Apple isn't an audio company and although they're great at everything they do, I doubt they can catch up with Sennheiser, Grado, Audio Technica etc when it comes to pure audio quality. Where they're better is probably connectivity, noise cancellation (which is still garbage imho), integration with their hardware. Same with their Homepod - it was innovative not in absolute audio quality but in the way it was omnidirectional and could "fill a room" with sound (if I remember correctly, from having read a review) and connectivity. If you just want great audio for your vinyl, CD or Flac collection then you don't get a Homepod. $300 worth of HiFi gear would be better.
- xvector 6y ago
  The development budget for the Max was in all certainty bigger than the development budget of the flagships from any of those companies, if not bigger than the companies themselves. I would not be surprised if Apple shatters the value of their headphones. Apple’s $9 DAC outperforms many “audiophile” DACs costing hundreds or even thousands of dollars.

tootie 6y ago

Completely expected for Apple. Look at the top of the mass market, copy their features, embed it in the iOS ecosystem, make the case white and silver, charge 25% premium.

elicash 6y ago

I HATE the standard Bluetooth experience. If reviews show choosing and switching devices is a better experience with these headphones, that’s worth paying something extra for.

310260 6y ago
I agree with that in the case of something like the AirPods Pro but not necessarily for $549. Superb audio quality would have to be the main selling point at that price.
- elicash 6y ago
  Yeah, I'm not sure HOW MUCH extra I'd pay for not having an aggravating experience when I start them up. I just know it's worth something extra. At minimum, this is a "wait for reviews" situation. I will say, I feel like wearing them while walking around is asking to be mugged. Like walking around with a stack of $100s on your head.
- bdcravens 6y ago
  I think that's true of everything Apple puts out. It's consistently better by many standards, but often overpriced even then.

corobo 6y ago

I dunno if the price is worth it or if it's mostly Apple Magic Pricing TM but honestly having a virtual assistant on hand is pretty good for day to day use - I'd love that in an over-ear. Combine that with wireless and presumably Apple's headphone device switching ability and I'd be tempted if not broke > better sound at a cheaper price Oh nice you've tested them then? How's the sound for mainstream non-gold-plated ears?

falcolas 6y ago
Probably absurdly bass heavy with muddled mids, based on other Apple and beats headphones. So I’m sure the mainstream will love them.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

acqq 6y ago

Does anybody know if any product of "established professional audio companies" has built in "gyroscope and accelerometer" and can remap "the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves"? I guess some virtual reality headgear has something like that, but which audio headphones? And which audio headphones of "established professional audio companies" have four microphones built in and the chip with "10 audio cores" to adapt? Including one microphone directed to the ear, not to the outside. I guess some could have something close to that, but which? First to know if we compare apples and oranges, then to learn about the alternatives.

bhandziuk 6y ago
"the sound field so it stays anchored to the device, even as the user’s head moves" What does this mean? I genuinely don't get it.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  If you play audio on your phone while wearing Airpods, and you turn your head, it still sounds as though the audio is coming from the direction of your phone.
  - acqq 6y ago
    Traditionally, it's not about the phone, the technology is meant to provide the effects one hears with the complicated 5+1 speakers and similar setups (typically today called "home cinema" etc), where you can "hear" the effect or the music appear from different directions (e.g. behind your back, right and in front of you left, or even the steps moving across the room). The effect can be heard when you're in the center position between many speakers and the content is produced for that. But, if you move your head while wearing the headphones (which should help you figure out where the sound comes from) the change that gives you the idea "where something is" won't be heard if the headphones aren't able to "know" that you moved your head at that moment and adjust the sounds accordingly. For adjustments, typically a lot of computation is needed. In VR or AR the same effect could give you a direction information of everything virtual around you. The virtual door on the right of you scratches, and as you approach it you hear the noises louder, as you turn your head, the noises are obviously from behind the virtual door... etc. Edit: to answer the "stereo" question: so it's about the audio mixed in more than 2 channels, or VR and the like effects.

skor 6y ago

Apple products are now "for the (wealthy) masses". Unfortunately they focus less on professional users. Beyerdynamic DT-1990 are great headphones btw but I don't think Ill see anyone walking around with that :)

gwbas1c 6y ago

If you only use Apple devices, the way they integrate with your mac / iphone is probably better. But, given that these only work with Apple devices... I'm going to be honest, I have a set of Beyerdynamic DT 770 pro's collecting dust right next to me as I type this. (I used to use them when I worked in an office.) I have some 3M "hearing protection" muffs that I bought for mowing the lawn, and they happen to have bluetooth headphones in them. They aren't as good as the DTs, but they are pretty darn close; and good enough that I prefer them when I travel to the DTs.

omega3 6y ago

It's the same question for 20 years.

tompccs 6y ago

$499!? That puts it in the same price category as: Palm Pilot, Blackberry Curve and Nokia N95, among many many others. Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional phone companies offering better phones at a cheaper price.

jefftk 6y ago
The iPhone was very different, and in many ways much better, than its competitors. I'm not seeing that here?
- MisterPea 6y ago
  Better is subjective. It most likely doesn't have the audio fidelity as the headphones OP mentioned, but something like Transparency mode is such a great feature for me. The end product experience doesn't always correlate to existing metrics of quality.
- squeaky-clean 6y ago
  Not a single one of the headphones mentioned by OP have bluetooth, noise canceling, or a built-in microphone.
  - Mehvix 6y ago
    That's because the ones mentioned are all audiophile headphones focused only on sound quality. There are plenty of headphones, notably the Sony wh1000xm3 for $230, which have bluetooth, noise canceling, and a built-in microphone plus they work with non-ios devices
    - Reason077 6y ago
      AirPods, including AirPods Max, support Bluetooth 5.0 and do work with non-Apple devices.
      - 6y ago

arbitrage 6y ago

Because their bluetooth implementation is garbage compared to apple's.

airstrike 6y ago

> That puts it in the same price category as: Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-1, Beyerdynamic DT1770/1990, Grado RS2e, among many many others. It looks like none of these are wireless, so I don't think the comparison is accurate.

jojobas 6y ago
Then there's Sony WH-1000XM4.
- jayd16 6y ago
  You can pick up the WH-1000XMs for like $180 if you're patient though. $550 is pretty steep.
  - jojobas 6y ago
    Where did you find $550 and what's your $? They were released at US$350 in August and sell for less now.
    - jayd16 6y ago
      That's in comparison to these $550 ApplePods Max.

gdubs 6y ago

Apple has been very successful at leveraging a “complete the set” psychology among the faithful. When you’re happy with all of your other Apple gear, it’s easy to impute — to borrow a favorite Steve Jobs word — the level of quality you’re accustomed to onto a new product you’re unfamiliar with. Apple has ALWAYS operated at a premium margin, and appealed to users who want quality, but also don’t want to spend time comparison shopping laundry lists of features and components. These will appeal to people working from home, just in time for Christmas when people are willing to spend a little. With a pandemic raging, if you’re in the market for headphones you can’t exactly go out and try a bunch of pairs on. (Guitar Center is going bankrupt, if I recall.) So people will likely be happy to know there’s a product made by Apple that fills an additional niche — so they won’t have to give it much thought and will know that it’ll probably be of similar quality to what they’re used to with other Apple gear.

hhjinks 6y ago
It's scary to me how precisely this post describes me, and how I haven't even been cognisant of it.

cactus2093 6y ago

These are in a completely different category than pro audio headphones, they are wireless with active noise cancellation. As someone that owns a couple of the high end models you mention, and uses my Bose qc3 headphones every day, if you don’t get why that’s a difference all I can say is I highly recommend trying it. If you don’t want to pay $550, then get the Bose or Sony equivalents. All the audio quality in the world doesn’t do you much good walking down a noisy street, on a plane, or even sitting in a noisy open office. I’ll happily take pretty good sound + wireless and noise canceling over great sound in these environments. What I’m guessing Apple is trying to sell based on this price point is sound on the same level of the high end models you mention, with the convenience of wireless noise canceling, plus the (gimmick?) of spatial audio. I’m very curious to try them at some point to see if they deliver.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

eigenvalue 6y ago

Besides assuming that Apple can’t match those other (very small, likely undercapitalized) audio companies in terms of sounds quality— something I sort of doubt considering that Apple probably spent more in R&D on these than those companies have had in total cumulative revenues combined— it also assumes that it’s all about the sound quality. As someone who just ordered these, I wear noise canceling headphones (currently Bose QC from nearly 5 years ago) for several hours a day while I work, and I can tell you that I care much more about comfort and noise canceling performance. I just assume great sound since that has been available for decades now in decent headphones. I remember buying Grado SR80s back in 2002, and they sounded great. Unfortunately, they hurt my ears after 30 minutes and everyone around me could hear my music. Also, they had a thick, heavy cable. Sound quality isn’t everything. Considering that Apple just made Intel look like a bunch of fools despite Intel making more processors for longer than just about anyone, at this point it’s silly to be so skeptical of Apple when they introduce a product like this after years of effort.

bsagdiyev 6y ago
When Sennheiser is very small and/or undercapitalized and therefore must know nothing about audio... I really hope you’re either joking or just uninformed.
- eigenvalue 6y ago
  That's true, I was more thinking of the smaller, boutique companies he mentioned. Sennheiser had $916mm in 2019 revenues. But consider that Apple is estimated to have close to $18b in total AirPods revenues in 2020. And my point isn't that they "must know nothing about audio," it is that they do not have some kind of monopoly on audio engineering. There is absolutely no reason why a company like Apple can't hire the very best people and give them insane amounts of resources to produce a better product. Also, it's important to remember that Sennheiser has dozens of products (I count 26 over-ear headphones alone on their website) and must spread R&D resources much thinner. Apple focuses all their energy and spend into just a couple of key products.
- sib 6y ago
  By comparison to Apple, Sennheiser is both small and undercapitalized. And the more "boutique" suppliers are much more so. In Apple's fiscal 4th quarter alone: 4Q 2020 revenue: $64.7B 4Q 2020 capital returned to shareholders: $22B And for Apple's fiscal year: 2020 revenue: $274.5B 2020 R&D: $18.8B So Apple spent more than 19x Sennheiser's 2019 revenue in R&D this year.

tinco 6y ago

You mean the Bose Quiet Comfort and the Sony WH1000X category. None of the headphones you mention are relevant in any way.

lock-free 6y ago

I'm all for shitting on overpriced products but those you list aren't the same product category. Wireless noise cancelling headphones worth a damn are expensive. Not to mention, Apple is the only company making a headset where the mic doesn't suck and have trash fidelity when you need to speak and listen at the same time.

zeptonaut22 6y ago
I'd love to hear an Airpods Max mic test here. This is the only meaningful info I could find on its microphone: > With AirPods Max, voice calls and Siri commands are crisp and clear due to beam-forming microphones that block out ambient noise and focus on the user’s voice. Mic quality has become a much higher priority for me and I think others since starting to work from home. In my opinion, high-quality voice audio helps greatly improve the quality of conversations over VC.
- lock-free 6y ago
  Part of this is Bluetooth's fault, but Apple has found a way not to kneecap their mics over bluetooth so I'm not sure why industry leading wireless audio (Shure, Sennheiser) that have put engineer years into low power, low latency, high fidelity wireless codecs can't make a headset that doesn't sound like Skype on DSL.
jojobas 6y ago
Sony WH-1000XM4.

sradman 6y ago

> $549!? ...I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. In addition to brand trust which other commenters describe, there is multi-device interoperability within the Apple ecosystem. Pairing with multiple devices is non-trivial and multi-device operation is not as seamless with non-AirPods hearables. This is about extending the AirPods user experience (UX) to an over-the-ears form factor. Bang-for-the-Buck consumers always struggle with Apple positioning. UX is almost always the intangible factor.

Terrario 6y ago
So you willing purchase products from a company that active shuns support of industry standards and third party integration in order to lock their customers to their proprietary ecosystem and then see this reduction in options as a value?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

hlava 6y ago

They must have some marketing strategy already prepared. Similar to that of Beats by Dre. Just make it popular trough popular culture (movies, music videoclips, interview with Hans Zimmer wearing these) and the kids will persuade their parents that they just need to have it. Thats how the bandwagon picks up speed.

MLpractitioner 6y ago

I can imagine companies buying these for employees

45ure 6y ago

>$549!? At this price, it is a luxury that can wait until AirPods Max 2, as I have already upgraded to XM4/Buds+/Jabra 75t this year for work and pleasure. However, at first glance, some integrated design aesthetics will provide the necessary appeal for dedicated fans e.g. the digital crown, colour scheme etc. It would be interesting to see the real world tests, and for starters, I would settle for a mini review by tubers like MKBHD.

ookblah 6y ago

great for those others now lol, apple effect... everyone can raise their prices now with no guilt

hbbio 6y ago

We are interested in the same audio gear. But they have CABLES! Most people I know would rather want a headset without any and I suppose that wireless devices come with an array of software problems that Apple can fix better than the others (just supposing, I don't own wireless speakers myself).

jpablo 6y ago

My main gripe with paying $550 for headphones is, they still revert to 90s landline quality when using the microphone?

edude03 6y ago
yeah, why is that?
- umanwizard 6y ago
  Because the Bluetooth profiles that allow two-way audio streaming (HFP and HSP) define a lower audio bandwidth. Your Bluetooth headset is probably switching from A2DP to HFP or HSP when you start a call.

m3kw9 6y ago

How do people say stuff like this before they even saw a single review or even hear it?

new_realist 6y ago

How do you know competitors offer better sound at a cheaper price? Do you own these?

m3kw9 6y ago

Because the best headphones are the ones you use the most. You won’t need a portable amp to make the sound better. This is the same analogy on how the best camera is the one you have on you, and the iPhone camera does not suck. I have a set of grados and I use them so little because of inconvenience. Instead is the AirPod pros that’s with me and use 95% of the time

hated 6y ago

Perhaps because when you walk into the Apple store for headphones you won't find the other brands there and these shoppers are only interested in Apple blessed products.

Technically 6y ago

Frankly, I probably can't hear the difference and the reason I'd pay is for a decent interface.

zepto 6y ago

What makes you think the sound is better? There is a good chance these are competitive in terms of sound quality at their price point.

redm 6y ago

“when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price” Have you tested these?

tlholaday 6y ago

> ... why you would buy these ... Feature-terms: For the microphones. Benefit-terms: For comfortable all-day telephony, up to 20 hours between charges.

golergka 6y ago

The core 5% of their audience would just buy what they know rather then spend their time researching the market they don't know and don't have any interest in. Spending that time and attention on research would be much more expensive to them than the cost of the headphones. And the 95% really want to signal others that their time is as expensive as of those 5%.

anonu 6y ago

Pricing a product is always a very hard thing. I speak from experience working at a startup and trying to understand what price the market will bear. The beauty with Apple is they build beautiful products that people covet. They effectively create a new market and force people to re-assess what they would pay for XYZ feature. I am sure the average user would never dream of spending $500+ for a pair of headphones yesterday. Now the landscape is all different. Its the same for the iPhone. Why do these things costs $1000? I can get most of the same features in just as nice a package with many Android phones. But still iPhone is the dominant winner in the US market.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
Brand new iPhone SE is $400. Entry level iPhones have never cost more than ~$650. The entry level specs are good enough for 80% of people’s needs, and an extra $100 or $200 probably satisfies 95% of people’s needs. I don’t see the purpose of the “$1k iPhone” meme when it’s blatantly false, and competing Android phones have also always cost around the same amount. And what’s also been blatantly true is the amortized cost of an iPhone over its longer lifespan versus competing products has always been lower.
- rafram 6y ago
  The iPhone 8/X generation turned a lot of people off because of its totally unaffordable pricing. The 8, which took the entry-level spot but was essentially a previous-model phone, cost $700, and the X was $1k. They’ve made this mistake before. The only possible saving grace that I can see is that it’s an image strategy: price a product very high in the first generation to build an “exclusive” image, then lower its price over time to increase sales.

kelp 6y ago

When Apple releases a new product and it’s not understood why people would buy it, I’m always reminded of this quote from former Palm CEO Ed Colligan when the iPhone was launched: “We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” Since then I’ve not wanted to bet against Apple. The reason people will buy these is because they are part of the Apple ecosystem. I have no knowledge of this, but I’m sure their out of the box pairing experience will be much like other Apple products. Hold your phone near it and it just connects. Far more seamless than most Bluetooth pairing. Any audio controls are built into your phone. And typically Apple has hardware and software designed to work together. They’ve done this with the iPhone camera to completely disrupt the digital camera industry. It’s the ecosystem plus the benefits of hardware / software integration.

ubermonkey 6y ago
Yeah, that's a big part of it. I've had BT headphones before my Airpods, and I really kinda hated them all. They were just clunky and awkward to use. Airpods changed my expectation around that kind of listening. The competition for a $549 Apple over-ear ANC headphone is, realistically, $300-$400 over-ear ANC headphones from everyone else. Because user experience and usability matter a LOT; I'd definitely pay a premium to avoid all the goofy crap that goes with "regular" Bluetooth.
jayd16 6y ago
>Since then I’ve not wanted to bet against Apple. Counterpoint, we're not all buying $1000 monitor stands and $700 caster wheels. Sometimes Apple is just gouging.
- kelp 6y ago
  Yeah, those are pretty crazy. However, that whole product line is clearly not intended for normal consumers. It’s for video editing, where most products are insanely expensive and that $1000 monitor stand is lost in the noise of all the other production costs.

ubermonkey 6y ago

That kind of knee-jerk rejection is just as weird as a knee-jerk promise to buy. All we know right now is that Apple has introduced wireless, ANC, over-ear headphones at a premium price. If I were looking to spend that kind of money on headphones -- which, we should be clear, isn't that hard to do if you're serious about it -- I'd absolutely listen to these. Given Apple's general approach to usability and quality, it'd be insanely foolish to dismiss them without trying them. >Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. This is what I'm talking about. How do you KNOW that $other_headphones sound better? The Apple model isn't even available yet. I mean, it's dead solid clear that Apple's making a big move here. It could fail. But they tend not to fail. If they're pricing these on par with serious high-end over-ear headphones, then they expect them to be able to compete with those high-end headphones on all the points people care about in that market. & about that: Your counterexamples aren't in Apple's target market here at all. None of them are wireless, and none of them include noise cancellation. Moreover, the Audeze are open backed, which (for the non headphone nerds still reading) means those around you can hear what you're listening to. You get great sound that way -- lots of folks would argue that the best sounding phones in the world are all open-backed -- but it means they're terrible choices for most modern headphone applications, like in a public place or open office. I love me some Grados, but they have the same problem. Apple's play here is against the high end wireless, ANC product in the market, not these audiophile-only options you mention. I have a $300 pair of ANC wireless Sennheisers that I typically used on planes (ha, ha; remember travel?) or in other contexts where I really needed isolation. They're clunky to use and have weird idiosyncrasies, but they do sound better than my Airpods Pro, and they work better for long flights. If they broke, would I consider the new Maxes? Absolutely.

ransom_rs 6y ago
> This is what I'm talking about. How do you KNOW that $other_headphones sound better? The Apple model isn't even available yet. I feel this part of the discussion is missing. A lot of people seem to love the HomePod for it's great audio quality at the price, and I have heard similar things for the HomePod Mini. Apple seems to be getting decent at making high quality audio equipment(per $), I feel like the quality of these headphones could be similar to the competition. Apple for sure has a history of overcharging for certain products (remember, you can get a monitor stand for $1k), but the M1 Macbook Air is probably the best $1,000 computer by a long shot.

apohn 6y ago

>Honestly, I don't understand why you would buy these when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. Probably because most of these companies have been "upgrading" their headphones for years, but really just making tweaks and increasing the price. So much of it is just marketing. I'm a former headphone addict who used to own a lot of expensive headphones. I saw the progression from when $300 was expensive (if you exclude the electrostatics), to suddenly $1k is the norm for a "High End" headphone. Then $1.5K, then $2000, etc. I'm not planning to buy the Airpods Max, but I give kudos to Apple for finally stepping up with computational audio and doing more than just making minor tweaks and marketing the hell out of it. Apple might actually push the other manufacturers to get off their ass and do some actual innovation.

alkonaut 6y ago

If I wanted $4-$600 over-ear headphones to go with an iPhone where phone calls and general phone integrations are an important part, then I'd seriously consider these. Otherwise not. As you say, as far as headphones go you can get better for less. But if seen as a phone headset that also has some hi fi qualities, then it makes more sense to go with the ones from Apple. I trust Apple to make that 100% integration with my iPhone whereas I don't necessarily trust Sennheiser to. The third party ones will turn out to drop calls more frequently in iOS 15 or something similar. That's the kind of issue you are paying to avoid.

tfehring 6y ago

It’s ludicrous but I’m still tempted. It seems like they uniquely offer the best UX in headphones since unlike AirPods you don’t have to intermittently take them off to charge them if you’re using them all day. “The best UX” is assuming you’ve bought into the rest of the Apple ecosystem, of course.

Eric_WVGG 6y ago

oh, you've heard them already? What do you think of the cups and the band, are they comfortable? What do you think of the crown control?

sombrero_guitar 6y ago

The Airpods Max is more comparable to something like Sony WH-1000XM4, Bose 700, or B&O Beoplay H9. You can't really compare wired openback headphones to headphones that are meant to be worn in public on the go. However, even among the wireless headphones with active noise canceling, the Airpods Max are more expensive than their competition. The closest in terms of features and price is the Beoplay H9 and that is $50-100 cheaper depending on where you buy it. To many people the extra integration with Apple products is worth paying the difference. For other people, especially those not all in on the Apple ecosystem, the cheaper competitors are a better option. However, comparing it to products in a different class is not a very good argument.

sorum 6y ago
Considering how many hours per day/week most of us spend with our headphones and how many years they last, I think the price difference is marginal over its lifespan. My Bose QC35s are almost 4 years old. My initial thought was to upgrade to the Bose 700 ($340), but the Airpods Max are $210 more expensive. If I assume 3 years before my next upgrade, this equates to $6 more per month. The in-ear segment was a slam dunk for the AirPods Pro - no exciting options competing there (Sennheiser's True Wireless were a huge disappointment). In the wireless over-ear segment on the other hand, it is very competitive and there are great options. The H1 chip isn't that much of a leg up, compared to how well Sony, Bose and the others handle connectivity to multiple devices. It'll boil down to the basics for me: audio quality and noise cancellation - if Apple can nail those, the price increase would be worth it in my book.

thanksforthe42 6y ago

It's a marketing tactic. The goal is to be unaffordable, this way people create goals to buy it and show off to their friends. This has been Apple's marketing since the 2000s. The product quality is secondary to the price. Even the users don't want everyone to afford it. They want to be seen as unique.

throw_m239339 6y ago
Well it depends. Once in a while Apple makes very good products for its price (like the latest Macbook Air, the iphone 3GS back then, and a few Macbooks in early the 2010's compared to the competition) and yes for the rest it's all about beign a luxury brand, absolutely.
- cromka 6y ago
  Also entry-level iPads, the iPhone SE. The regular AirPods. All very good and very affordable products.
  - thanksforthe42 6y ago
    This is so out of touch. Check your privilege.
    - cromka 6y ago
      $300 for an iPad is too much, where no other device can come close in functionality or price? Same with $400 for an iPhone SE? You're being obtuse, read into the context of this conversation.
      - thanksforthe42 6y ago
        Obtuse? Projecting Let me play you a sad song- There once was a poor minority boy who had bad parents through no fault of their own. They wanted to become a programmer, they got a $100 Android and started working on an app. Upon finishing they publish their app for a one time 25$ fee. But that only reached half the market. So next the boy bought a $1000 mac, a $400 iphone, and a $125/yr app store subscription. Lol

dkonofalski 6y ago

>offering better sound at a cheaper price This is what drives me nuts about stuff like this. How can you even say that? There's no way that you've tried these headphones so how can you possibly say that? Apple has gotten rave reviews with regard to audio quality in the Airpods Pro and the Homepod and Homepod Mini so why wouldn't they take that expertise and put it into these?

colinmhayes 6y ago
Apple has absolutely not gotten rave reviews on airpod pro sound quality. In fact that's that biggest complaint, they sound the same as normal airpods. I own airpod pros. They're great for what they are, noise cancelling true wireless that interact very well with apple products. But the sound quality leaves quite a bit to be desired.
- dkonofalski 6y ago
  Umm...what? Yes they do. They've been compared against the best over-ear headphones, especially noise-cancelling headphones. https://www.whathifi.com/us/reviews/apple-airpods-pro https://www.whathifi.com/us/reviews/apple-airpods-pro On top of that, going off of what that review mentions, the AirPods Max look to solve exactly that problem and compete with exactly that range of product.

ecf 6y ago

Paying an extra $200 for the H1 chip to be able to avoid professional audio companies and and their absolutely incompetent Bluetooth implementations is money well spent.

martinp 6y ago

I would at least consider them at $550, but in the Norwegian Apple Store they are $800. Even including 25% VAT, it's another $130 on top of that. Apple's region-adjusted prices are insane.

yk 6y ago

Apples customers don't know that. The entire strategy of Apple is, selling to people who compare a EUR 1500 MacBook to a EUR 500 HP laptop. Of course the MacBook is a lot better. Similar, these need to be a lot better than AirPods. They will be, and they will sell.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

briandear 6y ago

How do you know they offer “better sound at a cheaper price?” Did you listen to these yet?

pwinnski 6y ago

I'm happy with my AirPods Pro, so I won't be buying these. That said, looking beyond audio quality alone is why these exists. None of those headphones has the ease-of-syncing these will. I'm pretty sure none of those headphones support the spatial audio stuff these will. My corded Sennheiser HD280s started flaking off around the ear not too long after I bought them, while these seem like probably they'll wear better over time. Audio quality? Yeah, I'm guessing Apple's aiming for "good enough for most people," nowhere near studio quality. But on everything else, I suspect they've nailed it, especially for people who've used AirPods or AirPods Pro and appreciate the syncing, spatial audio, etc.

darthrupert 6y ago

And significantly cheaper than, say, Sennheiser HD820 or the Focal Stellia. We cannot know whether the price is crazy before somebody has reviewed them. I'm sure we don't need to wait for long. If it's an amazing experience, it might be a good deal. I know I would pay huge amounts of money at this stage of my life for a great experience. Like a hundred euros for a single glass of whiskey. Or hundreds of euros for a great meal. And headphones (even battery powered ones) last a whole lot longer than a shot of whiskey or a meal. But. They're wireless, and Bluetooth 5.0. They will be Bluetooth 5.0 in 5 years, and possibly obsolete because of that. Passive headphones bought today will be just as good in 5 years, unless something weird happens in speaker technology by then.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

hindsightbias 6y ago

I'll predict AirPods Max will gross more income for Apple in 2021 than all those brands high-end gear combined.

bstar77 6y ago

While I agree that sound quality is likely much better with those headphones you listed, they all require an external dac/amp to realize that quality. For high end, wireless, noise cancelling headphones, this might be appropriately priced.

Dwolb 6y ago

Does everyone here realize how incredibly huge Apple's audio business is? Their Wearables, Home, and Accessories business did $30B last year. If AirPods are even 1/5th of that category, that's a $36 business. For comparison, Sennheiser did about $1B in revenue and Bose did $3.6B. Are are absolutely huge and capable of surpassing every single company in terms of product and audio quality.

temporallobe 6y ago

For the record, the best headphones in the world are the Sony MDR-7506s, which sell for less than $100 in the US. These are well-known in the audio production and musician world and are prized for their accuracy, frequency response, comfort, and output. I’ve tried plenty of other high-end cans including a few $1000+ audiophile-realm models but just didn’t connect with any of them. In fact, I’ve owned many pairs over the past 2 decades and I just keep buying these when the get too tattered. I still have my first pair and they still sound as good as the day I bought them.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

rootusrootus 6y ago

Apple has made excellent headphones in the past, and at a competitive price point. For a long time their IEMs were a strongly recommended option for people who wanted excellent headphones at a pretty reasonable price. It's entirely possible that these headphones will also be competitive with headphones from other established companies that sell for a higher price. This is the same company that just brought us the M1, so we know they have hired plenty of engineering talent.

texasbigdata 6y ago
You can’t beat 8 drivers in one ear producing different frequency ranges in a custom sized devices made from a mould impression taken by an audiologist with 1 single cone. Sorry but no engineering talent can break the laws of physics. But agree they should make a great product overall regardless.
- cromka 6y ago
  > You can’t beat 8 drivers in one ear producing different frequency ranges in a custom sized devices made from a mould impression taken by an audiologist with 1 single cone And you can get these for $549, too?
  - texasbigdata 6y ago
    Fair but you can get 3ish at 499 excluding the imprint

CyanLite2 6y ago

This will be the new trendy way to do Zoom calls.

JoshTko 6y ago

Easy, I want all the features in Airpods but with better sound.

apetrovic 6y ago

I don't plan to buy it (I have Air Pods Pro and Bose QC35 II and they works well), but if I'm on the market for NC headphones, I would probably pay premium for Apple's, if reviews doesn't find any glaring shortcomings. Why? Because of the small things - switching between active devices on AirPods works very well for me (today I received a phone call by telling my iphone to switch to AirPods even if they're attached to my laptop), automatic detection of the right ear, head tracking (these spatial sound demos sounds amazing and I hope more applications will support it). These things means more to my average and aging ears than some flashy audiophile names.

ogre_codes 6y ago

> Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-1 These are wired headphones that lack ANC. Haven't listened to them, but just looking at the features it's pretty obvious these aren't for the same people. Apple's cans are Wireless high quality headphones with Active Noise Cancellation, transparency mode, and seamless switching. The only thing they have in common with the ones you listed is "Headphones". This is all setting aside the fact that you are prejudging audio quality of a product nobody has reviewed. I suspect there are a ton of people like me who are just fine with good sound and very interested in getting wireless noise cancelling headphones.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

yalogin 6y ago

I don't understand the higher end audio space and may be that's why, I don't quite understand your statement. What makes these other companies good at audio that Apple cannot match? They are a huge company that have been making audio products for a really long time and (no matter what one thinks of them) they own Beats too. So I actually say, if Sennheiser and others can do it Apple can do it better, not just because of their approach but also because of their SW/HW integration story.

simias 6y ago

It might be a bit of a hot take but from my point of view audio is mostly a solved problem. It's not like video where we still have trade-offs in terms of quality due to the huge bandwidth and processing involved for very high resolutions as well as the difficulty of reproducing very high dynamic ranges and framerates. None of this is relevant for audio. Despite what some audiocultists would have you believe CD quality is basically as good as it gets, you cover effectively 100% of the (normal) human hearing range, both in frequency range and dynamics. Ok, ok, technically not 100% of the dynamics, but few people care to listen to "distant ventilator on a quiet night" followed by "Airbus A380 taking off from the point of view of the jet turbine". Of course the quality of reproduction matters a lot, playing a CD through cheap $5 earphones is not going to sound great. But even there the cost of decent quality electronics keeps dropping and dropping. You can get a good quality DAC for a trivial amount of money (and stand alone DACs are still usually overpriced because they're for the niche/enthusiast/pro market, everybody else uses whatever their smartphones/laptop/desktop has integrated). Buying ultra high-end, ultra-expensive "audiophile" equipment these days is effectively like buying mechanical watches. It's because you like the luxury and craftsmanship, or you're making a fashion statement. Apple knows that, hence these AirPods. If you're about function over form you'd sooner get a cheapo Casio quartz watch. And there's nothing wrong with that, it just annoys me when audiophiles try to justify their fashion statements with pseudo-science.

TimTheTinker 6y ago
“spatial audio” is the killer feature here. It’s one of the last “unsolved” audio problems (at least in available headphone/earphone product lines), along with the upper frequency limit on noise canceling, which this product doesn’t solve.
- shortandsweet 6y ago
  Killer feature huh? Why have I never heard of it before this post.
  - TimTheTinker 6y ago

fastball 6y ago

Have you tried these headphones? How do you know others are providing better sound at a cheaper price?

egsmi 6y ago

> established professional audio companies offering better sound Didn’t these just come out? How do you know the other offering have better sound?

reaperducer 6y ago

when there are a lot of established professional audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. I won't argue about the price. But considering that exactly zero HN commenters have tried these, how can you categorically state that the audio is bad? People used spec sheets to make the same assumptions about each iteration of AirPods and were wrong each time.

Reason077 6y ago

> "$549!?" Sony WH-1000XM4s will set you back $350 and these are favourite NC headphones for many. The AirPods Max have some clear advantages over those: 9 microphones, huge suite of positioning sensors including gyroscope and accelerometer etc. Presumably the sound quality and NC will be at least as good as Sony's, and the software, UX and "build quality" significantly better.

thefourthchime 6y ago
Yep, this is exactly what I expect. I also expect they'll cost $350 by next Black Friday and force the rest of the industry to copy the build quality and some features.
strogonoff 6y ago
I’m finicky about audio quality, still I favour Apple products generally. I was willing to give Apple a chance last year and got AirPods Pro, but they proved abysmal in terms of everything—comfort for wearing long term, isolation, sound quality, going out of sync with each other, and a while ago one of them started to emit loud noise randomly. It’s likely that some of those issues are related to my unit and individual fit, but I’m back to Shure SE215/SE425 and their black foam tips (which achieve very similar overall attenuation without active NC[0]) as my go-to in-ear headphones. For over-the-ears I have fairly old (and virtually unbreakable) Sony WH-1000XM3; when their battery goes I would love to give Apple another chance but the price tag makes it hard to justify. IMO to any audiophile/sound engineer familiar with the brands mentioned by eertami the price of Apple’s new AirPods would indeed appear outlandish. [0] Measurably so: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/apple/airpods-pro-truly-wireless#comparison_348 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/apple/airpods-pro-... vs. https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/shure/se215#comparison_348 https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/shure/se215#compar...
- Reason077 6y ago
  I have the XM3s too. I agree about their indestructibility (they're the only headphones I've owned in years that haven't broken within a year or so!), but mine have developed an annoying hissing sound in one ear when noise cancelling is on. They also have that "plasticky" feel and annoyingly "creak" in the headband when they move around. The comfort is unmatched, however, and battery life is still fantastic on them despite very heavy use. Not sure I can imagine that battery ever dying! I've been toying with the idea of buying XM4s but I'm tempted by Apple's. I guess I'll give them a try and can always return them if the comfort etc isn't as good as Sony's.

jasonlotito 6y ago

> audio companies offering better sound at a cheaper price. It's not just sound though, right? Can you point me to an offering that offers the same features that Apple is offering here? Wireless, with a high battery life, automatic switching, Siri, noise cancellation, spatial mode, etc. > At least airpods have a unique selling point in their portability and ux but I don't see how this benefits over-ear cans. I don't see why portability and a good UX are somehow not needed for over-ear headphones.

asdffdsa 6y ago

Did you see the notes? - adaptive EQ - noise cancelling - transparent-mode - 3D spatial awareness If Apple nails those, then it's worth the money in my book.

wetpaws 6y ago

Pretty sure quite a lot of people will buy it _because_ of the price, not despite it.

paulpan 6y ago

For every value product (e.g. the SE lineup), Apple puts out an outrageously priced one like this. Much like the $129 wireless charger (cable sold separately),it's intended for die-hard fans. Apple user demographic is across the entire economic spectrum so I'm sure that 1) this will sell well and 2) it's a great pair of headphones. Worth pointing out that this doesn't have any auxiliary ports so you can't use it on airplanes, etc...unless there's an upcoming lightning-to-aux adapter. It feels like a culmination of the "no headphone jack" vision started with the iPhone 7.

novok 6y ago

My other disappointment is how they didn't use this to improve bluetooth too. They could of used this to add a new set of proprietary bluetooth protocols to improve the audio quality of voice calls and general listening. BT microphone + headphone streaming is fairly high latency and low fidelity. Same with general audio. Could of called it Apple Bluetooth HD or something similar. Missed opportunity.

romanovcode 6y ago

These ones have microphone.

samatman 6y ago

You're assuming they'll sound worse. I don't consider that a safe assumption. Apple is an established professional audio company. Macs are the computer used in production and DJing, have been for decades. They take sound seriously, and when Apple says less than 1% distortion across the entire audible range, well. They could be lying, but I wouldn't bet money on that.

floatingatoll 6y ago

I don't trust any of those companies to deliver Bluetooth headphones that use best-in-class audio protocols to prioritize audio quality over compatibility. I expect them to outsource a Bluetooth chip that can't negotiate AAC over the air, because they weren't willing to pay the chip cost or licensing fee. I expect them to be unable to easily pair with five separate devices (including Windows 10) and transition between them rapidly. I expect them to cheapen their audio experience when they go wireless. If Apple's new thing was wired only, I wouldn't even consider them. I already have my custom balanced-XLR Beyerdynamics on a pile of Schiit on my office desk. They serve that purpose beautifully, and I see no reason to change that. The DT1770s that you compare them to are not wireless. They're not in the same market at all as Apple's wireless products. Of the manufacturers you list, I trust none of them to meet wireless needs. I trust Apple to meet wireless needs as much as I trust Beyerdynamic to meet wired needs.

whiddershins 6y ago

Do you know for a fact those companies are providing better sound? I’m not saying you are wrong, I would just like to know if this is based on something specific.