3 ms·

Isn't this pricing pretty in line with other high end ANC headphones? e.g. Bowers & Wilkins PX8 ($699), Focal Bathys ($849), Sony WH-1000XM6 ($399), Kef Mu7 ($

Isn't this pricing pretty in line with other high end ANC headphones? e.g. Bowers & Wilkins PX8 ($699), Focal Bathys ($849), Sony WH-1000XM6 ($399), Kef Mu7 ($399), Bose QC Ultra ($449)

kakacik 7mo ago
Or Sennheiser momentum 4, 150 bucks and sound at least as good if not better, have absolutely huge battery compared to tiny apple one, more comfortable and generally work much better with non-apple ecosystem (also apparently they support multi-device pairing but I haven't used that one). Don't pay the novelty price shortly after release, these go down quite a bit after introduction, ie last year Sony are basically the same device.
- arccy 7mo ago
  Sony actually listened and made the cups foldable again though
- margalabargala 7mo ago
  > Sennheiser momentum 4, 150 bucks Where do you see these at 150? Lowest I see is 250.
  - elicash 7mo ago
    Amazon price history: ranges between $187 and $430, with average $277. $250 now. (So I agree with your take.) https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B0B6GHW1SX https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B0B6GHW1SX
- aram99 7mo ago
  a link?
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
- mwelpa 7mo ago
  Yeah, but anc is trash in the Sennheisers.
mvdtnz 7mo ago
Weird response. He said "I don't understand how a pair of headphones can be $549" and you responded "here are some headphones that are priced at $549". Yeah. We know. It's just hard to understand how anyone can value headphones at this price. It's lunacy.
- dzhiurgis 7mo ago
  My Sony XM3's still going something like 8 years now. Incredible value. I have a lot of Apple gear, these would be obvious next choice because of integration, but I struggle to justify why otherwise. They heavy, going to pain to repair and cost much more.
- porphyra 7mo ago
  It costs that much because people are willing to pay more for better sound, better noise cancelling, etc, even if the returns are diminishing. Perhaps a $500 pair of headphones only sounds 3% better than a $200 pair. But people will still shell out for better headphones. Sometimes they just think it is better even if it isn't actually measurably better. The existence of numerous successful products on the market is evidence that this is a niche where people are willing to pay for such products. It's kinda like, who decided that TVs and phones should cost the same? Or who decided that a khinkali should cost 3 times as much as a xiaolongbao?
  - halayli 7mo ago
    Reading your parent comment and the responses, I feel be missing the point others are trying to make. There's much less technology, components, and material in a headphone compared to laptops. The circuitry in the headphones is closer in complexity to a charger than a laptop.
    - porphyra 7mo ago
      The cost of something doesn't always correlate with the technology, components, and material. A Hermes bag doesn't even have a single circuit in it compared to headphones and laptops. Yet it costs more.
NoPicklez 7mo ago
That's not what they were saying and the same can be said for those listed. But that they can cost the same as a Macbook Neo which arguably has significantly more technology in it.
- porphyra 7mo ago
  A Moto G also has more technology than a Nakajima WPT-160 typewriter (which is still in production) but the latter costs more. Comparing "technology for the buck" across totally different kinds of products and markets sometimes just doesn't make any sense.
  - NoPicklez 7mo ago
    The point isn't for it to make sense necessarily, it's just simply an interesting thought and not one that always needs a logical answer in every case.
- quentindanjou 7mo ago
  I recently bought 4 wooden chairs that costed me more than that but there is significantly more technology in a Macbook Neo
  - NoPicklez 7mo ago
    Exactly and its just interesting to think about that such insane engineering has gone into a product that costs less than 4 wooden chairs. Yes it can be explained logically but its just an interesting thought.
  - addandsubtract 7mo ago
    Those 4 wooden chairs don't stand the chance of turning into a brick, though.
neya 7mo ago
First off, $150 more isn't a small amount to be considered "in-line" with the others. That's roughly 40% more. The difference is also Apple neither has the audio legacy of those companies nor the quality of those products to warrant that kind of premium. To Apple, it is just another market they can go after, but a lot of those companies built their entire foundations on audio. You are not going to convince me Apple is in the same category as the company that invented the Walkman and CDs. Also, if you look into the teardown videos, it's really a cheap driver from China - all plastic, not even using aluminium for the basket, just literally hard-glued onto the body. It's not repairable nor eco-friendly. It's anti-consumer. Sony uses Aluminium housing for their drivers and they are the cheapest in the lot.
- KaiserPro 7mo ago
  > audio legacy of those companies Ex studio tech here. Legacy doesn't cover contracted manufacturing. I'm not defending apple here, but using chinese drivers (which I assume is a synonym for poor quality) is fine so long as they are binned for performance, and matched/tuned to housing. I'm assuming the mic inside the ear cup is there to do dynamic EQ. Also the drivers are screwed into a solid aluminium housing, so they aren't glued. NS10s which are the standard reference mixing speakers were chosen not because they were high quality, but because they were average. If you could get your mix to sound good on those, it'd sound great anywhere. So yeah, they are expensive. Would I buy them? probably not. I'm reasonably happy with my plantronic jobbies. Are they perfect? no, are they comfortable? yes. Is the active noise cancelling actually effective? also no, but then ANC is only really useful for a small subset of noises types. (even on Sonys. )

Isn't this pricing pretty in line with other high end ANC headphones? e.g. Bowers & Wilkins PX8 ($699), Focal Bathys ($849), Sony WH-1000XM6 ($399), Kef Mu7 ($399), Bose QC Ultra ($449)

kakacik 7mo ago

Or Sennheiser momentum 4, 150 bucks and sound at least as good if not better, have absolutely huge battery compared to tiny apple one, more comfortable and generally work much better with non-apple ecosystem (also apparently they support multi-device pairing but I haven't used that one). Don't pay the novelty price shortly after release, these go down quite a bit after introduction, ie last year Sony are basically the same device.

arccy 7mo ago
Sony actually listened and made the cups foldable again though
margalabargala 7mo ago
> Sennheiser momentum 4, 150 bucks Where do you see these at 150? Lowest I see is 250.
- elicash 7mo ago
  Amazon price history: ranges between $187 and $430, with average $277. $250 now. (So I agree with your take.) https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B0B6GHW1SX https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B0B6GHW1SX
aram99 7mo ago
a link?
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
mwelpa 7mo ago
Yeah, but anc is trash in the Sennheisers.

mvdtnz 7mo ago

Weird response. He said "I don't understand how a pair of headphones can be $549" and you responded "here are some headphones that are priced at $549". Yeah. We know. It's just hard to understand how anyone can value headphones at this price. It's lunacy.

dzhiurgis 7mo ago
My Sony XM3's still going something like 8 years now. Incredible value. I have a lot of Apple gear, these would be obvious next choice because of integration, but I struggle to justify why otherwise. They heavy, going to pain to repair and cost much more.
porphyra 7mo ago
It costs that much because people are willing to pay more for better sound, better noise cancelling, etc, even if the returns are diminishing. Perhaps a $500 pair of headphones only sounds 3% better than a $200 pair. But people will still shell out for better headphones. Sometimes they just think it is better even if it isn't actually measurably better. The existence of numerous successful products on the market is evidence that this is a niche where people are willing to pay for such products. It's kinda like, who decided that TVs and phones should cost the same? Or who decided that a khinkali should cost 3 times as much as a xiaolongbao?
- halayli 7mo ago
  Reading your parent comment and the responses, I feel be missing the point others are trying to make. There's much less technology, components, and material in a headphone compared to laptops. The circuitry in the headphones is closer in complexity to a charger than a laptop.
  - porphyra 7mo ago
    The cost of something doesn't always correlate with the technology, components, and material. A Hermes bag doesn't even have a single circuit in it compared to headphones and laptops. Yet it costs more.

NoPicklez 7mo ago

That's not what they were saying and the same can be said for those listed. But that they can cost the same as a Macbook Neo which arguably has significantly more technology in it.

porphyra 7mo ago
A Moto G also has more technology than a Nakajima WPT-160 typewriter (which is still in production) but the latter costs more. Comparing "technology for the buck" across totally different kinds of products and markets sometimes just doesn't make any sense.
- NoPicklez 7mo ago
  The point isn't for it to make sense necessarily, it's just simply an interesting thought and not one that always needs a logical answer in every case.
quentindanjou 7mo ago
I recently bought 4 wooden chairs that costed me more than that but there is significantly more technology in a Macbook Neo
- NoPicklez 7mo ago
  Exactly and its just interesting to think about that such insane engineering has gone into a product that costs less than 4 wooden chairs. Yes it can be explained logically but its just an interesting thought.
- addandsubtract 7mo ago
  Those 4 wooden chairs don't stand the chance of turning into a brick, though.

neya 7mo ago

First off, $150 more isn't a small amount to be considered "in-line" with the others. That's roughly 40% more. The difference is also Apple neither has the audio legacy of those companies nor the quality of those products to warrant that kind of premium. To Apple, it is just another market they can go after, but a lot of those companies built their entire foundations on audio. You are not going to convince me Apple is in the same category as the company that invented the Walkman and CDs. Also, if you look into the teardown videos, it's really a cheap driver from China - all plastic, not even using aluminium for the basket, just literally hard-glued onto the body. It's not repairable nor eco-friendly. It's anti-consumer. Sony uses Aluminium housing for their drivers and they are the cheapest in the lot.

KaiserPro 7mo ago
> audio legacy of those companies Ex studio tech here. Legacy doesn't cover contracted manufacturing. I'm not defending apple here, but using chinese drivers (which I assume is a synonym for poor quality) is fine so long as they are binned for performance, and matched/tuned to housing. I'm assuming the mic inside the ear cup is there to do dynamic EQ. Also the drivers are screwed into a solid aluminium housing, so they aren't glued. NS10s which are the standard reference mixing speakers were chosen not because they were high quality, but because they were average. If you could get your mix to sound good on those, it'd sound great anywhere. So yeah, they are expensive. Would I buy them? probably not. I'm reasonably happy with my plantronic jobbies. Are they perfect? no, are they comfortable? yes. Is the active noise cancelling actually effective? also no, but then ANC is only really useful for a small subset of noises types. (even on Sonys. )