5 ms·

> certain types of music - music listened to by young people Can I feel old now? Where's my lawn? > People aren't buying the headphones for the sound quality,

by creshal 12y ago

> certain types of music - music listened to by young people Can I feel old now? Where's my lawn? > People aren't buying the headphones for the sound quality, they're buying it for everything else. I find this worrying, really. Are we so desperate to consume that we're willing to buy shit just for sake of buying?

icebraining 12y ago
It's not for the sake of buying; it's for the sake of showing them off. Like we did with jewelry for millennia.
- coldpie 12y ago
  Or the ultimate in form-over-function: women's footwear.
  - blowski 12y ago
    And ties - what purpose do they serve other than social signals?
    - mironathetin 12y ago
      "And ties - what purpose do they serve other than social signals?" Here is an answer: <exaggerate>I am the slave of my company, that's why I wear an expensive, totally useless thing around my neck, that lets me sweat in summer and breathe hard all year round. My company asks that and I do what they say, because I always do what everybody does. And I rather shit my pants than to hold the minority opinion :o)))).</exaggerate> Well, you are right, its also a social signal.
      - blowski 12y ago
        Depends on the quality. A $300 silk tie sends a different signal to a $2 tie from a supermarket.
        lwhalen 12y ago
        It's still a very expensive, very soft, noose around your neck.
    - 72deluxe 12y ago
      Useful for blowing your nose on? I suppose if you wear one around your head it signals something, socially.
    - bane 12y ago
      You'll notice that ties are (thankfully) finally starting to die out. I've just spent a few weeks in back-to-back meetings with very senior execs, and maybe 1 our of 5 people bothered with a tie. Industry reports show that the neckwear business is hemorrhaging after peaking in 1995. Good riddance.
MichaelApproved 12y ago
> I find this worrying, really. Are we so desperate to consume that we're willing to buy shit just for sake of buying? There's no need to worry, this isn't a sign that society is going downhill. Buying Beats for something other than sound as the primary purpose is no different than buying something purely for fashion sake, which is a centuries old human practice. This comment reminds me of how every generation finds the next generation's actions worrying. edit: Grandpa Simpson nailed it: "I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me. It'll happen to you..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV0wTtiJygY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV0wTtiJygY
- cafard 12y ago
  Yeah, makes me want to cuddle my Pet Rock till I feel better.
blowski 12y ago
Why is buying headphones based on their audio quality superior to buying headphones based on their aesthetics?
- bane 12y ago
  because headphones are for listening not for looking
  - blowski 12y ago
    Not necessarily if you're buying them as a fashion accessory, which is the whole point of the article. Beats saw a gap in the market, much as Apple did 10 years ago.
- teh_klev 12y ago
  Because their main job is to reproduce sound in an acceptably accurate manner? Owning a pair of Beats is like owning a Ferrari or a Porsche powered by a 75BHP 1L engine with suspension made of play-doh. Nice to look but drives like crap.
  - JohnBooty 12y ago
    > Because their main job is to reproduce sound in > an acceptably accurate manner? Check the frequency response graph of almost any speaker or headphone in the sub-$1,000 range (and quite a few over that price as well). Peaks and valleys all over the place. They're not trying to sound "accurate," they're trying to sound pleasing. And this isn't even a bad thing. Just understand that sound quality isn't objective, unless you're judging things by how flat their frequency response curve is -- and the headphones/speakers trying to achieve that are generally aimed at audio engineers.
    - teh_klev 12y ago
      Sure, but the GBP169(!) Solo's (not tried the full sized Beats) really don't sound good (I used a pair for an afternoon and was hugely disappointed by them), they are truly the epitome of a high performance car body wrapped around a lawn mower engine. I mentioned this in another comment, my 15 quid Sennheiser CX300 buds sounded way better than these overpriced fashion statements. I agree that sound quality isn't objective when it comes to hearing what passes through one's ear holes, but the sound reproduction that passed into my ears from these Solos was noticeably and objectively bad. I don't need a fancy graphs to tell me that. I should add that I did actually like the construction and build of the Solos.
ConceptJunkie 12y ago
Did you just time-travel here from the 1930s? Our consumer culture (good and bad) goes all the way back to the post-war boom. Tell ya what, I'll get off your lawn if you get off mine... :-)

by creshal 12y ago

icebraining 12y ago

It's not for the sake of buying; it's for the sake of showing them off. Like we did with jewelry for millennia.

coldpie 12y ago
Or the ultimate in form-over-function: women's footwear.
- blowski 12y ago
  And ties - what purpose do they serve other than social signals?
  - mironathetin 12y ago
    "And ties - what purpose do they serve other than social signals?" Here is an answer: <exaggerate>I am the slave of my company, that's why I wear an expensive, totally useless thing around my neck, that lets me sweat in summer and breathe hard all year round. My company asks that and I do what they say, because I always do what everybody does. And I rather shit my pants than to hold the minority opinion :o)))).</exaggerate> Well, you are right, its also a social signal.
    - blowski 12y ago
      Depends on the quality. A $300 silk tie sends a different signal to a $2 tie from a supermarket.
      - lwhalen 12y ago
        It's still a very expensive, very soft, noose around your neck.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    Useful for blowing your nose on? I suppose if you wear one around your head it signals something, socially.
  - bane 12y ago
    You'll notice that ties are (thankfully) finally starting to die out. I've just spent a few weeks in back-to-back meetings with very senior execs, and maybe 1 our of 5 people bothered with a tie. Industry reports show that the neckwear business is hemorrhaging after peaking in 1995. Good riddance.

MichaelApproved 12y ago

> I find this worrying, really. Are we so desperate to consume that we're willing to buy shit just for sake of buying? There's no need to worry, this isn't a sign that society is going downhill. Buying Beats for something other than sound as the primary purpose is no different than buying something purely for fashion sake, which is a centuries old human practice. This comment reminds me of how every generation finds the next generation's actions worrying. edit: Grandpa Simpson nailed it: "I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me. It'll happen to you..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV0wTtiJygY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV0wTtiJygY

cafard 12y ago
Yeah, makes me want to cuddle my Pet Rock till I feel better.

blowski 12y ago

Why is buying headphones based on their audio quality superior to buying headphones based on their aesthetics?

bane 12y ago
because headphones are for listening not for looking
- blowski 12y ago
  Not necessarily if you're buying them as a fashion accessory, which is the whole point of the article. Beats saw a gap in the market, much as Apple did 10 years ago.
teh_klev 12y ago
Because their main job is to reproduce sound in an acceptably accurate manner? Owning a pair of Beats is like owning a Ferrari or a Porsche powered by a 75BHP 1L engine with suspension made of play-doh. Nice to look but drives like crap.
- JohnBooty 12y ago
  > Because their main job is to reproduce sound in > an acceptably accurate manner? Check the frequency response graph of almost any speaker or headphone in the sub-$1,000 range (and quite a few over that price as well). Peaks and valleys all over the place. They're not trying to sound "accurate," they're trying to sound pleasing. And this isn't even a bad thing. Just understand that sound quality isn't objective, unless you're judging things by how flat their frequency response curve is -- and the headphones/speakers trying to achieve that are generally aimed at audio engineers.
  - teh_klev 12y ago
    Sure, but the GBP169(!) Solo's (not tried the full sized Beats) really don't sound good (I used a pair for an afternoon and was hugely disappointed by them), they are truly the epitome of a high performance car body wrapped around a lawn mower engine. I mentioned this in another comment, my 15 quid Sennheiser CX300 buds sounded way better than these overpriced fashion statements. I agree that sound quality isn't objective when it comes to hearing what passes through one's ear holes, but the sound reproduction that passed into my ears from these Solos was noticeably and objectively bad. I don't need a fancy graphs to tell me that. I should add that I did actually like the construction and build of the Solos.

ConceptJunkie 12y ago

Did you just time-travel here from the 1930s? Our consumer culture (good and bad) goes all the way back to the post-war boom. Tell ya what, I'll get off your lawn if you get off mine... :-)