3 ms·
> And then guess who bought Beats for their exquisite metal weight technology? That's right, it was Apple. It's self-evidently extremely disingenuous to claim
by georgespencer 7mo ago
> And then guess who bought Beats for their exquisite metal weight technology? That's right, it was Apple.
It's self-evidently extremely disingenuous to claim that Apple bought Beats for their "exquisite metal weight technology", so I thought I'd double check your claim that there are "metal weights" inside Beats headphones.
All of this appears to stem from two blog posts, written by the same VC.[^1] The first time they accidentally tore down counterfeit Beats, and when they managed to repeat the process, they "stuck by [their] claim" that:
> "…these metal parts are there to add a bit of weight and increase perceived quality with a nice look."
The BOM estimate they provide lists the following metal parts:
* Inner cast metal separator
* Springs
* Torx screw
* Self tapping screw
* Cast metal supports
* Stamped metal ear cup
None of these are extraneous weights not serving a purpose. The claim of the author might be better presented as:
"Beats headphones use heavier metal components instead of plastic ones, and I think it's because they add weight."
There are a lot of very good reasons to use materials that dampen unwanted interference like parasitic vibrations. Stiffer materials such as metal parts typically flex less, and have fewer (but usually more pronounced) resonances than plastic parts, which have intrinsic damping but might distort.
A good example of this is that the driver in your headphones is moving. Therefore the housing it is placed in must consider sprung/unsprung mass. Adding metal components increases the mechanical impedance.
So:
1. It is entirely possible that your claim about the weights is correct, and Beats chose to use metal components rather than plastic purely to add weight to the product.
2. There are a great many other possible explanations for using metal rather than plastic, and I don't think that you're likely to be party to them. For example: maybe they had the parts in-chain already and didn't want to have to tie up hardware engineering or supplier quality engineering for a new plastic part.
[1]: https://beneinstein.com/how-it-s-made-series-yup-our-beats-were-counterfeit-but-they-cost-about-the-same-to-make-as-the-364cc6808d18 https://beneinstein.com/how-it-s-made-series-yup-our-beats-w... (the one where they tear down real Beats)
- UqWBcuFx6NV4r 7mo agoThanks for doing the legwork. Any “nehhh apple BAD they make products for IDIOTS!” comment should be treated with skepticism, as usual.
- whaleofatw2022 7mo agoIdk im not sure why they bought Beats aside from marketing hype in the first place...
- raw_anon_1111 7mo agoFor Apple Music
- JSR_FDED 7mo agoBeats is a $1B+ a year business. Investment-wise it was a no-brainer. Cultural cachet of Beats - note how Apple kept the brand. Jimmy Iovine & Dr Dre showed them how to tap into a new demographic. It helped Apple get up and running with streaming faster, they needed to compete with Spotify.
- AdamN 7mo agoThe Beats brand was a great entrée to an entire market segment that Apple was trying to better access. I'd say it was a masterful acquisition (and integration).
- KoolKat23 7mo agoI completely disagree. Beats brand basically disappeared after that or at the least has become "uncool". Apple had iTunes already, they very well could've acqui-hired and improved their service themselves. Apple music slowly died and is only becoming resurgent now, many years later.
- menno-sh 7mo agoBeats (or I guess Apple under the Beats name) still make H1/2 based in-ears that are generally well received.
- cardiffspaceman 7mo agoYep! I own both a pair of AirPods and a pair of Beats. The Beats were designed for a lower price point, without noise cancellation, than the AirPods so I can’t offer a head-head comparison.
- kevin_thibedeau 7mo ago> Cast metal supports Seems excessive. They should do something like forged carbon to cut weight and have removable gravity enhancement.
- zeagle 7mo agoExactly. Look at something like the Sony XM5s that have a defective design that breaks in a light wind. There a class action against them for the crap they pulled and refusal to warranty. Not that I’m bitter at them or anything.
- hnlmorg 7mo agoNothing new here then. Back when I used to DJ some 20+ years ago, people would complain back then that Sony headphones would constantly break on them. Meanwhile I had Sennheisers and they could take an absolute beating and still work fine. While also being plastic and cheap looking in comparison to other brands in the same price packet.
- seec 7mo agoYeah, I had a pair of MDR-V700 back in the day, and they broke in about 2-3 years max, without any abuse, just randomly. I gave them to a friend who "quick-fixed" them with a screw at the pivot point, but they lost all their flexibility after that. He didn't mind because he was using them solely for drumming, but I couldn't use them anymore. That being said, I have had some nasty experiences with Sennheiser's IEMs as well. Had to send 2 of them in warranty within a year, products that were in the 300-600 euro range back around 2010!