I've switched out a heavy set of over-ear headphones specifically because they were too heavy for me, and would make my neck feel uncomfortable after some time.
Also, don't knock earbuds as being innately less noise-cancelling than over-ear headphones - in-ear monitors (IEMs) that enter your ear canal and produce a good seal can passively filter a great deal of sound, musicians use them all the time and I used to wear my pair (without any active noise cancellation) on airplanes—they work at least 75% as well as Airpods Pro active cancellation does, while sounding really great.
But after a long period of listening like on a long-haul flight, the physical pressure of those get tiring on my ears... and active noise cancellation also makes my ears tired after a while too... so seems there's no silver bullet. Honestly I've just gone to not using headphones of any kind for extended periods of time and listening with speakers whenever practical.
I can't help but feel that this is an explicit strategic design decision for Apple. It lets them position the AirPods Max as having (sound and build) Quality over (quiet) Comfort. It creates a market position for them without having to try very hard, and allows them years of incremental (yet revolutionary) weight saving improvements for future generations of the product.
(note that I'm not implying the QCs have poor build quality, just that a heavier product implies better BQ. I am implying that the QCs aren't difficult to beat on sound quality though)
A bit off topic, but if you wear those around Stockholm, Sweden where I live, you will probably be robbed.
I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only. I think noise cancellation really shines when out and about in public, like the subway. But I can't imagine anyone using those things on the go, at least not where I live.
When it comes to Stockholm, I can have an image. I've been there on vacation for a total of 2 months. I've made friends in Tensta, Södermalm and in Östermalm and slept in all places.
If someone tells me that Östermalm is now a place where people rob you more easily than 10 years ago, then I have enough of a feeling how the social landscape changed. In Stockholm, I've experienced a couple of crime-ish situations in those 2 months that I didn't experience to such a frequent or great extent in Amsterdam (where I live).
In short: it might be that things in Stockholm have gotten a bit more sour.
It’s an isolated anecdote of which there are tens of millions of others just like it in the cities you mentioned. Crime stats should be based on up to the minute evidence not anecdotes.
I dislike reading anecdotes as evidence as well. However, sometimes I personally simply feel free enough to express myself on HN and don't think any further than that. In most cases, this is fine, but in some cases I become part of the problem (posting anecdotes that are interpreted as "evidence").
So I'm happy you posted your reaction as I feel it's the reason why I've been downvoted a couple of times as well. Upon rereading my comment, I agree with your comment. I'll try to finetune my behavior accordingly.
Comparatively it's one of the safest cities in the world, as in, its less safe then maybe 4-5 cities in your list?
Sure it has a couple of dodgy areas, but I lived in Sodermalm and Kungsholmen and never felt unsafe around those, I moved from Brazil and my hometown gets as many robberies reports in a day as Stockholm gets a year.
I can understand some people might be targeted for these status items but I never had any issues moving around even with an expensive laptop, phone, headphones with me, taking the public transport every day.
Sweden has taken in around 1-1.2 million people in the last 10 years or so, roughly 10% of the population. Mainly from countries that have vastly different values than swedes.
These huge numbers in combination with really poor integration has lead to a very segregated society. You now read about gang shootings, rapes, humiliation robberies (they rob the victims then piss them in the mouth or cut off an ear or so, just for fun). These things are happening daily now, it used to be maybe once a year you read about a shooting or particular nasty rape/robbery.
It looks like it has gotten much worse in recent years. There was a 60-minutes block from Australian TV on the topic. I couldn't find the whole video, but here's a fragment:
I'm generally the person to be very critical of Sweden, but this is somewhat unfair as the definition of "Rape" in Sweden is incredibly broad, and includes people who can't give consent such as those experiencing fear.
Heck in 2018 they passed a law that says "Any sex act which does not have explicit consent is rape"[0] including those where there are no threats, coercion or violence of any kind.
I mockingly considered creating a "consent" app which could be signed with BankID.
Sweden is also unique in that it counts every offence as an occurrence of rape- meaning that if you're "raped by your husband 12 times a year" those are 12 separate cases of rape and not 1 (like it would be in the UK).
There is also speculation that in Sweden they take rape reports very seriously, which leads to more people coming forward with cases of rape.
This line of thinking has been discussed before, sadly by the extreme far right.[1]
> I'm generally the person to be very critical of Sweden, but this is somewhat unfair as the definition of "Rape" in Sweden is incredibly broad, and includes people who can't give consent such as those experiencing fear.
I'm unsure if I'm reading the way you worded this incorrectly or not.
Are you saying people who are too scared to say no are only included because the definition is "incredibly broad"?! Do you think people too scared to say no shouldn't be included?
If so, I'd argue you must have a very narrow personal definition, which worries me.
I'm critical of Sweden in that the people have blind trust of authority and are failing to integrate people (this includes me, as a British migrant), and will go to great lengths to avoid any mention of demographics when talking about crime. Talking about it _at all_ will get you branded a racist.
However I'm saying that the definition of rape in Sweden is broader than other countries and encompasses more things, so the same action in the UK could be classified as domestic violence or sexual harassment (thus, not rape) but in Sweden it would be rape.
For one (of many) example(s), in the UK it's impossible for a woman to rape a man, because legally the perpetrator needs to penetrate the victim. This is not the case in Sweden.
It is. All these other kids saying otherwise are just spouting poppycock, and some of it frankly seems like thinly veiled racism. (It's the immigrants, you see!)
Look, if there are people there's gonna be crime. That's just the way it goes. But as far as moderately large cities go, Stockholm is far from dangerous. Like anywhere else some areas will be worse than others, but the parts being discussed in these comments – the inner city – are not the favelas these people seem to claim. Stockholm is a perfectly fine city, but haters gonna hate and all that I guess.
Thugs getting off too easy though, now that's a real thing.
Where in Stockholm do you live? IMO, you're giving an unfair and exaggerated view of Stockholm as a whole. Yes, there are some areas that are more affected by criminal gangs than other areas. But I wouldn't go as far as saying that there's a high risk of getting robbed "around Stockholm".
I've lived in the inner city parts of Stockholm most of the time (Östermalm/Norrmalm, Södermalm, Kungsholmen).
I would definitely not wear 500-600 USD headphones in any of those areas.
But I think crime in Stockholm is a bit off topic. However I don't think the inherent risk of being robbed - wherever you are in the world - is off topic for the discussion.
People rob kids of Airpods all the time, because it's a status item. These new Airpods will be a status item too. This will increase the risk of robbery - be it in Europe or the US or elsewhere.
I'm sure there are larger cities in the world where the likelihood of getting robbed is low (Tokyo?), but that'd be the exception rather than the norm.
> I would definitely not wear 500-600 USD headphones in any of those areas.
I would say that the risk of being robbed in any of the mentioned areas is very low, even during night-time (if you don't actively are looking for trouble)
I'm afraid I have to disagree. Every time I had to pass through some of those places at night it was a scary experience. Got robbed twice, I can't remember how many times I had to leg it. And I only lived in Sweden for 2 years.
Whether you are targeted for a mugging is dependant on whether the criminal thinks you are an easy target. Most muggings will be crimes of opportunity.
I used to live in a very dodgy part of Spain near Gibraltar. I was never mugged or beaten up. I've been told by people "You look like you can handle yourself". Some of work collegues which were skinner, more fresh faced got robbed, beaten and in one case had what they believe to be a gun pulled on them. I never had any problems. I don't look like an easy target due to my appearence and size, those guys unfortunately do due to their size and appearence.
There might be a risk for a kid getting robbed of expensive gear - but adults not wearing headphones for the robbery risk? Never heard of it as a fellow Stockholmer.
Lol this dude reminds me of my parents who wouldn't let me walk ten blocks home at night in my tiny ass Canadian home town because of how "dangerous" it gets after dark. Never mind the crime rate is literally an order of magnitude below any of the various American metros in which I've lived (and walked home after dark in, never experiencing any issues).
Some peoples' perception is entirely driven by watching too much local news, and yet they somehow convince themselves they or their friends have personally have experienced all of this. Hook them up to a lie detector and it would draw a perfectly flat line as they spin their tales.
> Hook them up to a lie detector and it would draw a perfectly flat line as they spin their tales.
I don’t follow.
A flat line on a polygraph (whose accuracy is a debate for another time) would indicate they are telling the truth, or rather that they believe to be doing so.
I get that you’re claiming their perception of reality is skewed, but deriding people for saying what they genuinely believe to be true is odd.
It's just a weird feature of the human psyche you notice as you get older. People convince themselves that things they heard about from the news or other people actually happened to them or their friends. Maybe it starts out as a simple story told at a gathering, exaggerating for entertainment & abridging context for simplicity - "one time my friend..." - but after repetition and several years becomes a thing they believe literally happened as they told it. You often see this manifesting as tales of local criminal acts or encounters with homeless people. This sincere fabricational tendency, while humorous, does ultimately amplify a very skewed & harmful perspective in local politics.
It's the reason why boomers swear they were present at every major event during their lifetimes, as though we're surrounded by Forrest Gumps.
Yes, I understood your larger point. What I don’t get is the relevance of the polygraph line, which essentially amounts to “but they think they’re telling the truth”. Well, yes, I sure hope they do and are arguing in good faith rather than deliberately lying.
That sentence appears to argue that you think them passing the polygraph is a bad thing—why make the comment otherwise—which doesn’t make sense to me. It doesn’t affect your larger argument, but it doesn’t support it either and thus stood out. It’s as if you had ended your post with “bananas are radioactive”—true, but I’d be left wondering why you had felt the need to mention it.
I don't think it can reasonably be called good faith - it arises from a sort of carelessness with the truth, wanting to be embalmed in justification of the worst cruelties of our society at ground level so as not to critically engage with them. Much more preferable to deal with cynical political operators who don't believe what they say. Those are quite rare, and usually more transparent, so would not explain why this sort of thing pops up so much online.
If that answer doesn't satisfy you then call it observational humor regarding urban & suburban neuroses. Not really sure what you're driving at otherwise.
Sweden has taken in way more immigrants than our systems can swallow, this means the system as a whole is leaking.
This has lead to lots of segregated areas where there is no future, just people living on welfare getting nowhere in life, as much as 60% of kids fail to even finish High School in these areas, even thou they get 3x-4x of the funding compared to other schools in "good areas". And you get NOWHERE in Sweden without education.
The vast majority of the immigrants is also men which has skewed the male/female ratio in certain age groups.
The violence we see now is mainly from second-generation immigrants because they have no real connection with their home country and they have no real connection with Sweden either since they have grown up in areas where there are no Swedes.
These aimless young men + a system that have failed them + a fast growing gangster culture that promises money and respect + no real consequences for young criminals (4years max for murder, rape is a couple of months maybe if anything at all) leads to a very fast growing criminal networks / gangs.
The gangs now also have an endless supply of young men willing to do whatever it takes since we a constantly taking in more people even thou the system is showing no signs of being better at integration people.
I wanna be very clear thou, this is not due to race/skin-color or other racist bullshit, it is simply input vs output, ANY system in the known universe that gets overburden crashes or starts behaving in unfavourable ways and that is where we are now.
By pulling the break, give the system time to adjust and come up with efficient ways of integrating the people already in the country and when we start to see positive numbers then we can start taking in more people again.
I wrote "young criminals" I should be more clear, the gangs often use people below the age of 18 to commit murders since you then you get 4 years juvenil but are usually out before that due to 2/3 rule. There is even a saying in these circles: "Att brösta en 4:a för att bli en 100-gubbe" meaning Do the 4 years and become a 100-man, in other words commit a murder and you get respect and will be taken care of when you get out.
No, it is because of a demographic shift due to oversized non-workforce immigration. Due to this, there are more and more areas characterized as "special vulnerable" (my translation of a Swedish police term). This is partly explained in English on this wikipedia page:
The page shows how they have evolved since 2015 but if you go back to 2000 or so, they were just a handful.
Basically, the immigration has been larger than the society can "organically" integrate, and the result are new structures in society which did not exist before.
It is not the fear of being robbed, but more a general feeling of personal safety, e.g. hearing cars, bicycles or any people around you, is why I don't like to wear any kind of headphones while walking around. I feel deprived of an important sense. This of course would be worse with any kind of noise-cancellation. Only when sitting town in a train I feel reasonably comfortable, but also a bit nerveous about missing an important announcement.
I remember people used to say the same thing in early days of Apple mobile devices that shipped with (then) unusual white in-ear headphones. White headphones -> high probability of an expensive gadget in a pocket.
Exactly. My desk is next to my dryer, which is currently running, and my furnace is in a closet behind me. ANC helps block those noises, which would be inescapable otherwise unless I wanted to play my music way too loud.
Yeah, same with three kids here (although it does mean people on video calls hear them, or in one case a fire alarm, before I do). I have to admit I will sometimes wear them either way though, I feel it helps me focus.
> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only. I think noise cancellation really shines when out and about in public, like the subway. But I can't imagine anyone using those things on the go, at least not where I live.
FYI here are some examples of why I swear by my noise cancellation headphones while working from home during a pandemic in a densely populated city:
- Washing machine and dishwasher running cycles during the day
- The fridge vibrating at higher frequencies (don't know much about fridge mechanics but this soemthing fridges to do maintain a certain temperature)
- Other people in the household talking, cooking, making coffee, fetching cutlery and plates etc.
- The high decible hum of delivery scooters/mopeds usually accelerating much faster than they should in what is supposed to be a quiet road
- Road noise from delivery vehicles which are heavier than your typical car
(ps admittedly the last two points are only a problem when I have the windows open but occassionaly someone revs an engine which can be heard through the windows)
- During summer months with the windows open, passers' by can be heard from my desk. I live on just off a "quiet road" in my city, my desk is on the first floor and is on the other side of the room from the road. Yet people's conversations are loud enough to make a noise.
Individually there is little wrong with these sounds (except maybe mopeds which I wish were quieter) but collectively they cause noises during working hours for which I am grateful to have noise cancelling headphones at home.
PS I guess Apple are also targeting people who will take these to the office eventually.
I'm totally with you on needing quiet when working from home. My much more economical solution is a pair of industrial earmuffs with earbuds inside if I want sound. In particular mine are the 3M Peltor X5A: https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company-us/all-3m-products/~/3M-...
I've actually used AirPods Pro (and my girlfriend used her Bose QC35 IIs) to fall asleep in a hotel room with a very thin wall and a loud conversation in the next room over. If you toss and turn or insist on sleeping on your side, they might not work, but if you just sleep on your back or front there shouldn't be much of an issue.
If you recall, the early iPhones were stolen the lot until Apple tied the devices to the Apple ID. This allowed you to lock the device and make it a worthless piece of hardware when the owner wanted it to be.
In principle, with all the electronics on the AirPods, one could imagine a situation where they are locked to an Apple ID and if they are stolen they could be locked down. This would dramatically lower the resale value and prevent future thefts if Apple were to implement this.
I usually refer to my headphones as neighbor cancelling headphones. I live in an apartment and while my neighbors are nice people, inevitably you get some noise from televisions, people moving around, etc. Noise cancellation gets rid of most of that. Also, I like being able to walk around in my place without having to worry about wires.
I was ambivalent about noise-cancellation until two things happened at home this year…
- With the assistance of a friend, I rebuilt my kitchen. He swore by his AirPod Pros, I dealt with hours of tablesaws and sanding with foam in my ears.
- Then my building owners jackhammered apart the rooftop overhead in an asbestos removal project.
Now I’m thanking my AirPod Pro every time my neighbor’s baby wakes up at night.
There’s a personality type that enjoys complaining that their city is just the worst and they would leave if they weren’t just so accommodated etc. I’m not saying that’s you; I don’t think it is.
But when it happens in Sweden, do they call it “Stockholm syndrome”?
> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.
I never wear headphones when walking/biking etc, but I’ve worn mine pretty much non-srop at home for the past year. The computer fan, neighborhood noices, fridge, all is quieter and the music is better. I focus better.
Where they really have shown themselves to be indispensible though is on my 2h30 roundtrip daily commute by train[1], complete bliss.
I don't think Apple is even going try to claim that they can compete with other $500 headphones in pure audio quality. Their pitch is entirely going to focus on design, easy pairing that just works every time, and clever audio processing 'magic' like spatial audio.
I won’t make a claim about this product (might not even if I had heard them), but Apple does make headphones for a living.
https://macdailynews.com/2018/11/05/apple-is-the-worlds-lead... (2018): “When its three headphone brand categories are combined (EarPods, AirPods, Beats – an Apple company) Apple has the leading market share in headphone ownership with 24%. Sony is second with 22%, followed by fellow traditional CE stalwarts Panasonic and Bose”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-27/apple-ced...: “The AirPods have come to define the true wireless (TWS) earphones category, with Apple accounting for nearly half of all sales in 2019 and expected to grow to 82 million units this year, according to Counterpoint Research data. More affordable alternatives from Chinese rivals, however, have eroded Apple’s lead and the Silicon Valley company now finds itself with just over a third of the market, at 35%”
Somehow I feel like the audio quality and build quality is not going to be as good as the companies that actually make headphones for a living
Audio quality? Maybe not. Although it probably depends on how you precisely define audio quality. I’m not aware of any competing headphones that have a feature equivalent to the directional audio that these AirPods have.
But build quality? Apple will give any remotely comparable product a run for its money. Very few companies can match Apple’s expertise when it comes to mass producing hardware products with high-end materials and matching build quality. I think it’s close to a certainty that any headphones that are undeniably nicer than these ones, will also be significantly more expensive.
I honestly think that audio quality is consistently poor on Apple stuff and they try to patch over it with EQ boosts and marketing.
AirPods are better than EarPods, but they're still in $25 earphone range.
AirPods Pro are nice, but you can get wired IEMs for <$100 that sound just as good. In that price range you can get Pinnacle P1 ($200) or ER4XR ($250) which dump all over them. I use AirPods Pro daily, not for quality, but for convenience.
HomePod is probably the biggest disappointment I've ever heard. $300 and it sounds like a plastic box, despite "computational audio".
At $550, you're solidly in headphone big leagues. Beyer DT770 or DT990 are close to perfect and they're <$200. Beyond that point you're hitting diminishing returns in audio quality; double price is going to get tiny marginal improvements in quality.
I'm eager to hear them but I can't imagine them outperforming DT990s, despite costing twice as much.
(Yes, none of these options have bluetooth or ANC. Get an ES100 for BT. If noise is a problem, get IEMs or AirPods Pro.)
When it comes to audio quality and red wine I am completely unable to appreciate the quality differences over a certain minimum threshold, which is quite low (at least as measured by price). Maybe I would be able tell the medium level stuff from the very high end if I was allowed to compare them to each other in an undisturbed environment, but if I then had to guess which was the more expensive, I would likely get it wrong a good chunk of the times. I usually tell people that my senses are just not acute enough, but secretly I suspect that most people who claim to be able to appreciate the differences that I am unable to, really aren't either and are at best just experiencing the placebo effect. The fact that you report to be disappointed by the audio quality of the HomePod, a product that a lot of reviewers praised first and foremost for its audio quality, does nothing to relieve me of this suspicion.
Who knows whether or not I am right or not? What I am quite certain of, is that I'm not likely unique when it comes to not being able to appreciate the small differences in quality that cost the most. Which is to say that for me and a lot of other people, it seems pointless to get hung up on whether one pair of very good headphones sound marginally better than another pair of very good headphones. Unless you're working in a studio as a sound producer, at a certain point the audio quality simply ceases to be the most important attribute of a pair of headphones. I don't know if it's true that you can get a pair of wired IEMs that sound better than the AirPods Pro, but even if it is, it's irrelevant, because the AirPods Pro sound fine to most people who buy them.
Through the years I've owned several different brands of headphones in the price range $100–$150 that I bought because reviewers claimed they were extraordinarily good value for the money when it came to sound quality. And maybe they were, but I've hated most of them for getting mostly everything else wrong: Wrong length of wire, wrong placement of microphone and buttons, and just horrible build quality.
I use the AirPods Pro not because they sound the best, but because they sound good enough and the convenience factors make them worthwhile.
I dump on the HomePod because it lacks any convenience factors that are meaningful to me [1] and it doesn't even serve the "speaker that sounds good" purpose [2].
So I really want to know what the value prop for AirPods Max is. They're not convenient or useful for travel because they're too big. They're not "best audio quality", because that's been done at lower price points. Spatial audio and ANC? Already solved, better, by AirPods Pro, at half the price. They're not even usable for critical listening or gaming because of Bluetooth.
So what are they for? Fashion? (Nothing wrong with that, but I'm sure as hell not going to spend $550 for it.)
[1] Siri can't understand me and it false triggers constantly.
[2] It wasn't even like, "hey its good but there are better speakers". They sounded like a cheap plastic box. They were better than my $100 Google Home. They're worse than the $120 soundbar I put on a TV. It's a low bar.
Have you tried the Homepod in a stereo pair? To me it makes a huge difference to the point that I assume that they have completely different profiles for them when running in stereo mode. Assuming a different audience than a single Homepod.
You're going to continually misunderstand the market if you think $200 wired headphones with a line running from your head into a $100 ES100 Bluetooth receiver clipped to your belt is an analogue for the wireless cans people want.
I do misunderstand. Please educate me! What makes these better than other headphones or the AirPods Pro, which are looking downright good value right now?
Can you expand on build quality? Do you mean that apple does not know how to build quality hardware? Or materials are cheap?
Or do you mean something entirely different by the build quality?
Take a look at the headband. It’s going to fall apart in a year with constant use.
Almost every other pair of headphones in this price range offers replaceable headbands, and many of them can be customized with off the shelf products.
Unless I'm missing something, aluminum ear cups seems to be a bad idea for colder weather. I wouldn't want to put cold metal on my ear every time I want to hear music?
The aluminium part of the ear cups doesn't come into contact with your body while wearing the headphones. There are thick cushions which are in between. Also, their main usage probably isn't for outdoor use, but more towards indoor.
I have no idea what the build is like, but if I were dropping $550 on some headphones, I would want them to not feel loose, rattley, or like they have plastic hinges/joints that are probably going to gradually accumulate "play" or break after a year. I would want shiny stainless steel joints that feel "buttery" yet reasonably tight. A feeling that if you accidentally sat on them or tossed them in a bag and got crushed, something might bend, rather than crack and break.
Btw, I wonder how they will let people try them in the stores. Seems like putting something on your head/ears that others have tried before you feels a little icky.
I've had Bose QC headphones in some form or other since the 90's, and the plastic has never seemed degraded. For my previous non-Bluetooth pair, the earpads eventually wore out and sort of disintegrated (after something like 8-10 years), but I bought a pair of replacement pads online and everything was back to new again. Haven't had that issue with my QC35II's yet.
All that to say -- I'd think all things being equal, good-quality plastic & lighter would be the way to go.
He complains it's too heavy, but then puts down other, lighter products made out of plastic.
He also puts down using it wired, even though it seems like a product to use at your desk (since it's heavy and doesn't have water resistance). Keep in mind, an audio cable is not included in the box, so maybe Apple is sending a signal to use it wirelessly.
Also, he doesn't think this device needs an off switch. This means you get to carry around the case just to put your device in standby. The case is an elaborate off button since it doesn't offer much protection.
> "I don't like any available option" isn't really worthwhile writing, is it?
It is, because it tells product designers that there is a gap in the market that no one is serving, and that they could release a product to fill that void.
You can say something is heavier than something else, and feels more premium without contradicting yourself.
He says they are not meant for use as wired headphones primarily, so recommends against them if thats what you want. Seems reasonable.
Regarding the Switch he says: "I’m not saying they should, but it’s very Apple-like that they don’t." To me it seems like he is staying neutral on the need for an off Switch right now - just commenting that he's not surprised.
I don't think they are bad takes. They are tepid takes at worst!
I wonder if it is genuine weight, or just non-functional weight packed into the headphones to give the appearance of quality like that which was found on a Dr Dre Beats teardown. Be interesting to see a teardown of these.
>He complains it's too heavy, but then puts down other, lighter products made out of plastic.
It's in fact possible to list the pros and cons of something so the reader can decide for themselves which matter to them without forcing a specific opinion onto the reader.
It is a funny thing with these headphones. For a long time, I had planned to buy another set of headphones - ironically because Apple refuses to exchange the worn-out earpads of my older beats. It is quite bad for the environment, if you have to dispose a product because a part like earpads, which has a very obvious wear limiting its lifespan, cannot be exchanged. Same of course applies for the battery, but that is still ok.
Hearing about the rumors of Apple headphones I postponed any purchase, as I was curious to see first what these headphones would be like and quite willing to buy them, even if more expensive than what I had before. So why arent the AirPods Max not an instant buy for me now?
First of all, the release 2 weeks before Christmas is odd timing, but that probably was beyond the control by Apple, they were not ready for production early enough, also this means limited stock. Basically the question was already decided as there was no chance to get them with the initial run and now are out of stock till spring.
A rather big gripe of mine are the colors. It is great to have different colors, buy why are they all so toned down? For the same reason I don't like the identical colors of the iPad Air. For some things I really like the colors to be ff0000 or 0000ff, alternatively at least 000000. I would like to see whether the "space gray" is dark enough, in the video by iJustine they looked nice, would like to check that out in a store before ordering.
The other one would be the rather weird case. Not only is it odd and I really don't need a case for my headphones in the first place, it is also mandatory to use to be able to switch them off. Which is probably the reason I won't get them. I don't want to have to put my headphones in a case every time I put them off for more than a very short while. Especially not in a goofy one. There needs to be an off switch on the device. Shouldn't be difficult to reprogram one of the two switches to work that way.
The other one is of course the issue with the device compatibility. As Gruber points it out: the spatial audio is great, but there seems no way to actually use this. I am not going to watch movies on my iPhone (I actually did this once to test my Homepods as a movie sound stage, which worked great. But I did it exactly once for satisfying the curiosity, watching a movie on the iPhone is no experience I want to replicate). This is a huge stinker and I don't know what Apple is thinking. It is already more than aggravating, that you cannot (reasonably) use Homepods as your Mac speakers. I just set up a new MacBook Pro, and indeed, my Homepods appear als sound output devices in the audio control, but as separate devices. How is it possible, that they don't communicate their pairing to Macs? Again, what is Apple thinking?
As a consequence, I am quite undecided yet. They do tick quite a few boxes, good build quality, probably great sound, Apple certainly has used all their vast acoustic skills on those. Battery and earpads are exchangeable, they should have a good life time. The price certainly gave me a short pause, this is not impulse by territory. I would be willing to pay it though for a product I am convinced about.
Ear buds are an area where some products are incredibly cheap to produce and can be treated like products that wear out (like underwear). They are insubstantial and easy to throw out. But there is a cycle where more premium products are made which then get copied and lose value. There will always be some people who want the best, but in a few years time the cheaper alternatives will probably sell more and be treated as disposable. They are fundamentally different products.
I have a pair of in-ear headphones that isolate sound better than any Bose I've ever tried. It's just a matter of finding the right tip size to create a seal. My tips actually make a popping noise when I pull them out.
I've had good closed headphones before, and they're... okay... but nothing like a good active noise cancelling headphones.
For example, the Sony WH-1000XM3 is already a relatively good closed headphone! If you put one on with the noise cancelling disabled, it still provides a quite decent amount of isolation. But then instant you press that little switch... near total silence.
I used to tell people that first class tickets on planes are a waste of money because: You're still on a plane, it's still noisy, you just get better food.
But now with my Sony headphones, cattle class feels like first class. It's bliss: I can sleep. I can watch movies and actually understand what people are saying. I can read a book without feeling like there's a running hair dryer behind my head the whole time. The cries of babies are completely inaudible.
>I used to tell people that first class tickets on planes are a waste of money because: You're still on a plane, it's still noisy, you just get better food.
You get much more leg room. You are getting much more space than an economy.
If you aren't tall and you stretch your legs from time to time, it's not a big thing.
Now, business class or whatever they call the thing where you can recline your seat almost horizontally, that's something. I can't really sleep sitting.
Good business class configurations allow you to lie completely flat.
Depending on the configuration you may have a real (narrow) bed feeling, or you may be lying in a sort of tube with not much space to move, but definitely completely flat.
If the price is not outrageous I always go for a business flight on long haul.
The price delta is usually in the thousands of dollars though. That said, especially for trans-Pacific I'll often try to get an upgrade using a combination of miles and dollars.
It amuses me that there are people think "nah I won't spend the extra $3k to make my trip livable" while working an industry where 30 year olds are paid $500k a year for writing a bit of javascript.
Most people in tech are not making $500K to write Javascript or anything else. And, even if you make a fair bit of money, $3K isn't a trivial sum to make even 12-16 hours of air travel a bit more comfortable. (It still isn't exactly fun even up front.) I do sometimes use miles and a co-pay to upgrade when I can but, generally speaking, I can get a lot more bang out of that money on other things whether meals or other experiences.
Why would the amount other people in my industry make have an impact on what I can afford? Much less whether I'd put up with a little discomfort for an extra $3k in my pocket.
Also funny how you yourself come up with the ridiculous salary of $500k, something ~nobody here will ever make, as the amount that finally makes $3k sound trivial to you. I agree with that much. That's the salary that would make me finally consider paying $3k for leg room.
That's limited to the US West Coast, almost exclusively.
You need to be level 7+ in a FAANG anywhere else in the world to make anything near that. And you definitely won't be there with "a bit of Javascript".
>the Sony WH-1000XM3 is already a relatively good closed headphone
It is not. It is a great Bluetooth/NC headphone but certainly not a good closed one compared to other closed back phones specifically built for passive isolation. It is also targeted at consumers.
Have you actually tried the HD280PRO I specifically talked about? It is a professional headphone that is very popular with drummers for a reason.
You're arguing with someone who said the Sony headphones are relatively good, and saying they are not because there are better headphones out there? Also, you're arguing with someone who claims they are satisfied with the Sony headphones? Should they not be satisfied?
I noticed their website mentions up to 32 dB attenuation. What does this mean in practice? A set of 3M Peltor X5 earmuffs have only 31 dB NRR, and NRR is a standard metric for ear protection. The Sennheisers don’t look anywhere near as isolating as the 3M muffs. Personally I use the construction earmuffs for drumming.
> I used to tell people that first class tickets on planes are a waste of money because: You're still on a plane, it's still noisy, you just get better food.
You also get more legroom and a less cramped seat.
If you're flying "only" five hours this may not be a big deal. If you're flying >10 hours (e.g., across the Pacific), then it can make a huge difference to comfort.
First is nice when I get upgraded, but I'd rather take say Qatar Business than BA first.
That said, the headphones I has on a US Airways Business from Manchester to Philidelphia were amazing - far better than the BA ones, so much that I bought a pair (QC25s) while I was in the States.
What with 2020 I haven't been on a plane for over a year now, and I've been on 3 trips on a train, so I've basically forgotten what "out and about" headphones are like. I do wear one on my ear if I'm watching something in bed (hook over ear). Never seen any wireless ones, fortunately I haven't downgraded from my iphone SE so can still use them.
For me at least, good noise canceling headphones make flying even quieter than the maximum rated earplugs I could find (because low frequency hum goes through almost any material)
Perhaps a bit off topic, but I am truly unable to use active noise-cancelling headphones. I'm not sure if it's just me being sensitive or if this is common:
Whenever I tried using noise cancelling headphones, I always felt what I can only describe as a high air pressure in my ears. The best I can describe it is the feeling of needing to pop my ears but popping them providing zero relief.
Is this common at all? Does everyone feel this but somehow are able to ignore it?
Anyway fully agree that good passive isolation goes a long way!
For a long time I thought that this was the case for me too and stuck with passive noise cancelling headphones. Then I tried the Sony 1000MX3s and didn't experience that issue, and I realized I had only really ever tried the Bose QuietComforts before. If you haven't already, it could be worth trying different brands to see if the issue persists across different noise cancelling systems!
But if the issue is only a technology or firmware issue what exactly causes it? Is it like a standing wave of pressure below or above hearing range? The mistery bothers me as much as experiencing it.
I did some reading on this before I bought my last headphones and AFAIR , the cause seems to be that not all frequencies can be canceled to the same extent. It’s not actual pressure on your eardrums, but the effect triggers that feeling. Different headphones have different characteristics, so it’s worthwhile trying different models.
I had this feeling aswell, but the noice reduction was worth it for me. After a week or two of much usage at the office the feeling went away. So, atleast for me, getting used to them helped.
The following article goes into the technical details of this phenomenon. TLDR: it's harmless, caused by an unnatural increase in volume as you move across the frequency spectrum (from great noise cancellation at low frequencies to nearly none at mid-frequencies).
This is a pretty common complaint, I've seen numbers as high as 18-20% feel some sort of pressure, and upwards of 50-60% of those people feel enough discomfort that they don't use ANC.
I feel pressure almost immediately but it doesn't the level of even mild discomfort until 7-8 hours of continuous use (my employer provides a pair that have an ANC option). Even then I can deal with it for longer if I'm watching a movie or something after work.
I get the same feeling with Bose QC IIs, but on planes it's worth the quiet. That being said IEMs and actual earmuffs work pretty well too if you don't mind looking a bit silly.
yeah, I find active noise cancellation bothers my ears too. Back when going to offices was a thing, I would keep multiple sets of headphones at my desk: an open-back headphone for really clear sound quality that lets sound through so that I could hear people if they tried talking to me (I like the AKG K240 MKII's for this but beware you need a headphone amp for these), and closed-back headphones when I'm finding the external noise distracting. For passive isolation I use Vic Firth's isolation headphones, they're designed for drummers to use for monitoring while recording drum tracks. https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/IsoHdphV2--vic-firth...
also if you already have earbuds that you like but they don't give you enough isolation, you can always wear earbuds under construction earmuffs, which is what I was doing before getting the Vic Firth isolation headphones.
But passive isolation will allways struggle with low-frequency-sounds. Motor-sounds, like the engine on an airplane, is easy for active NC - while passive struggles with it.
Yep, Etymotics are absolutely the gold standard in my opinion if you want a high quality sound experience while traveling (train, plane, etc.) I've had a crying baby directly in the seat in front of me for most of a 10 hour flight and didn't hear it with music on at a reasonable volume.
And the sound quality is really excellent for the price.
I agree that good closed back over the ear headphones work well. The issue for me is that I travel light and never take something that big and heavy to use when flying.
True. And I'd never buy a pair for that reason. (I wouldn't want them for travel and I don't need wireless or noise canceling for home.) For travel, I have in-ear Bose and (now) Airpod Pros. I wasn't interested in the original Bose over-ear for the same reason.
I've literally never heard anyone make this argument before. It's wild.
Nice Sennheiser over-ear cans are okay on a plane, but honestly aren't as good as solid in-ear options (e.g., Etymotic).
Sennheisers (or others) with ANC that are also over ear are FAR AND AWAY superior. It's astonishing how nice it is for the drone of the plane to just VANISH vs. being merely muffled.
Is your claim that Sennheiser HD280PRO headphones do a better job than these? Because I've got a pair, and I agree 100% with the author: the first time I tried some noise-canceling headphones was the last time I took my HD280PROs on a flight.
If that's not your claim, then it doesn't seem like your statement makes any sense.
Sure, HD280PROs are better than not wearing anything over your ears. But the flying experience is dramatically different once you have active noise-cancelling headphones, so different that, euphemistically speaking, there's no going back.
I honestly have to assume you've never used ANC headphones on a plane if you're making this claim. As someone who does own the HD280PRO and several ANC headphones, there's no comparison at all for environments with a repetitive droning noise like an airplane.
I have owned multiple pairs of that exact model. For $99 it's a great deal (they can take a beating... but not several beatings). But come on, the isolation is not even close, even to noise cancelling ear buds.
That is enormously different than my experience and I felt the need to respond because this is not healthy advice for your hearing. I have good closed back headphones and IEMs that isolate very well. My experience is that the airplane noise forces me to turn up the volume to unsafe levels and the audio quality is destroyed as well. Active Noise Canceling is a bit of absolute magic on the plane. The jet noise is almost eliminated and you can listen at safe levels with high fidelity. Plus, sustained loud noise can exacerbate jet lag. Having a quiet environment reduces post-flight fatigue. You're really doing yourself a disservice if you fly regularly without ANC.
I own both the Sennheiser HD 280 Pro and the Bose QC35 II. The active noise cancelling Bose headphones are vastly better on a plane trip. The HD 280 Pros are just not very good at reducing ambient noise.
Put it this way, the weight of these headphones is between that of an iPad Mini and iPad Air
As a motorcyclist the weight of a helmet is a real concern usually rivaling the safety rating but always higher than airflow which itself is high on the list.
I really do not see myself wearing any set of headphones that weigh this much, the XM4s by Sony are noticeable so weighing half again more has to really stand out. That he emphasized their inertia pretty much eliminates them completely.
I still really feel that the team involved here reached a ship it or shelve deadline after four years of development. Even the case looks like a last minute tie in which reveals two other sore points, they don't fold and they don't have a means to turn them off outside the case.
I admit I just got a pair but haven't really tried them out yet. I imagine it would take a lot of habit breaking for me to get comfortable with them walking around. If you're actually listening to music etc.--i.e. actually have a reason to have them in your ear--I think I'd still find it isolating.
AirPods which have transparency mode can work as low end hearing aids. Not a suitable replacement for people who require hearing aids, but for people who have light to moderate hearing loss they help.
Similar to the Bose QC20. I have both, and am starting to prefer the APP, but batteries don't last as long. I keep using the QC20 wired some each week too.
In both cases those 'transparency modes' do filter out a bit of useless noise, and I do feel a bit more 'aware' of things/people outside me with that mode on. I've often thought that's also at least partially because I intentionally switch to that mode for a reason (then switch back to full noise cancelling when done).
Same. The cacophony of NYC's subway system was starting to feel painful to me before I started wearing my QC35 IIs on the train every day. It's also healthy for your ears, since active noise cancellation literally blocks those loud noises from ever hitting your eardrums.
There are many consumer headphones with an “open air” design that let street noise in.
I live in a busy hipster neighborhood that’s also a major traffic hub... and I like it. I’m a city rat. The music is supposed to come with the roar of cars at a green light and the dozens of half heard conversations on busy sidewalks.
I have the-cheapest-model Sennheiser open airs and a with-mic-for-Zoom-calls JBL. The JBL absolutely isolates the environment mechanically. This is good for a meeting (except for the fact that you hear your voice from your skull, but heck.)
The wearing of them isn't, though. People were not hauling around their 70s hi-fi systems on roller carts to listen to music in their large headphones.
The original Walkman came with headphones [1], but they were light and fluffy. For a long time after, the trend was toward lighter, smaller. People wearing large headphones out and about are definitely a later wave.
I was just about to write the same thing. Big headphones were of course the way most headphones were made initially. And it didn't matter until Sony released the Walkman allowing to have good audio in a mobile environment. For years though, they tried to make the headphones smaller, though being far away from todays in-ear phones.
I really think it was Beats what made people wear large headphones in the public.
If you’re old enough (and of the right subculture), you may have been hauling your 70s hi-fi system around, but not on roller-carts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boombox#/media/File%3AChicago_... (also stops any complaints about these being too large :-) )
oh, I'm certain Over ear headphones were popular long before beats came along. as an example from the top of my mind I'd like to point to the 1999 music video "Freestyler" and I myself a teenager then was sporting them in the late 90ies early 00s
One of the more unexpected things on a good pair of noise canceling headphones was hearing conversations on airplanes that folks thought were private. Eliminating some of the background hum almost feels like a super power at times. (And occasionally an unwanted one)
Very true. I would never wear these things outside given that their overpriced and, currently, many young people in a year like this are unemployed. It's like begging to get robbed.
Bone conductive headphones are great if you want awareness. They don’t go in your ears, so no ear canal irritation either. Conversely, they are horrible at filtering out surrounding noises.
I'm not bothered by seeing people just out and about wearing big, probably expensive headphones, but seeing folks exercising even remotely strenuously in them is what I don't understand. I just can't deal with the thought of all that sweat soaking into the various soft parts of a nice pair of headphones.
They also have poop on the sidewalk and typhus. The one place where you can work for the likes of Google and Facebook, make near six figures and still have to live in your car.
I know it’s popular in a lot of Japanese animes, but I’ve never seen anyone walking around with over ear headphones in real life. I see them mostly in open offices worn by developers trying to get some quiet while they are coding.
That's really interesting, I see it all the time in NYC. Where are you located? Perhaps it has something to do with urban v suburban v rural? Or a cultural thing?
That's weird cause here in Texas I see them a lot and the only places I'm going right now are grocery stores, walmart/target, and home improvement stores.
If you took public transportation or go any place young people hang out you would see them too. (Malls or coffee shops)
> Every other pair of over-the-ear headphones I’ve ever used feel a bit cheap in comparison
This has always surprised my as someone who's owned a couple of pairs of B&W P-series headphones (P5 then PX). Portable headphones should be built to last, not just flimsy plastic. B&W got it right with metal construction (and with the newest PX models forged carbon fibre), no surprises Apple is building robust headphones too.
What B&W provide though, is a really solid benchmark (of many) (with the exception of spatial audio - which from Gruber sounds like it still has some shortcomings to overcome). They're £200 cheaper, really substantial and solid construction (with a proper hard carrying case - although similar limited folding), the newest carbon models will be noticeably lighter (if still a substantial 310g).
Obviously the Sony XM4s and Bose 700s are well in view too (although plastic construction can make them seem a less premium alternative).
I expect these will sell relatively well, but I can't see them flying off the shelves like their in-ear namesakes in such a crowded and competitive market, even with Apple's software bonuses.
In terms of build quality, I've always thought Bang & Olufsen made the best headphones. The H9 series is made with aluminum and leather, and costs just slightly less than AirPods Max.
> Portable headphones should be built to last, not just flimsy plastic.
Good plastic is not flimsy.
Polycarbonate, an almost commodity plastic, is really strong and light. The next step: composites are way better than any metal if you want a good strength-to-weight ratio. The best, most expensive bikes are made out of carbon fiber composite for a reason.
Plastic is commonly used as casing material for stuff designed for rough environments. Portable power tools, PA speakers, even guns. So if something designed to be used on the battlefield can be made of plastic, there is no problem for headphones worn, at worst, in the subway.
The only problem with plastic is that it suffers from being cheap, as in, not expensive enough. People want expensive products to be made of expensive materials.
Also, subconsciously we associate weight with quality, so much that cheap manufacturers sometimes add metal inserts to their otherwise low quality products to trick people into thinking they are better than they really are.
That it to say, unless you put a premium on look and feel (nothing wrong with that), don't hesitate to buy plastic headphones, they can last you a lifetime as long as the right plastic is used at the right place.
You can also have long-term durability issues. But this is long-term as in probably decades which isn't really generally relevant for consumer electronics. I have a few older kitchen appliances that have started spontaneously developing cracks. I've patched things up and bought a couple of (ill-fitting) replacement parts. But I'll probably end up having to replace them even though they're otherwise functional. (Of course, the materials may well have improved by now.)
I don't know if being BPA-free has anything to do with durability. I thought it was something that only mattered for food-related products (to avoid BPA getting into your food).
Good point. I suppose I'm just talking about the feel of the Aeropress and, say, Nalgene bottles. That plastic feels somehow less "cheap" to me than most plastic electronic devices. I wonder why?
"BPA-free" doesn't mean much. The industry has been moving on from BPA due to (very reasonable) fears about human consumption, but it appears manufacturers simply moved onto other BPA-like alternatives such as BPS and BPF that have not been as extensively studied, and which may have the same health hazards.
Exactly, plastic lasts 10000s years. I'm a believer now - I've rebuilt a lego set from my childhood and all the bricks fit and look pretty much exactly the same, 30 years later
Polycarbonate stops bullets, but it's also notoriously soft, scratches easily, it's a thermoplastic (so it melts with heat), and it's soluble in ammonia or acetone (so it's vulnerable to nail polish remover). Other than all that, polycarbonate is a perfect plastic.
Seconding the PX series high build quality. After losing my beloved a Sennheiser PXC 550s, I got the PX7 and it's very nicely made. The buttons and the embossed logos on the cups are the only at all cheap-feeling parts.
That said, the B&W v-shaped sound is not my favorite. Not unlistenable, but maybe not what I'd choose again.
The most durable headphones I've ever owned are Sennheiser HD 25 and made from plastic and super light. It was ~£100, sounds amazing and lasted me 15 years of being dragged to clubs, house parties and getting a fair beating. Only this year have I replaced them and that was only because I lost my old pair in a recent house move and figured "it's been 15 years, there's no shame in buying a new pair even though the old pair might turn up in a random box later".
However those cans don't have bluetooth, noise cancelling, a microphone nor adaptive EQing. They're literally just a high quality speaker, headband and copper wiring.
Reading this I immediately thought of the B&W PX. Really nicely made headphones which felt like they would last a long time. The battery would probably be the first thing to go. I really wanted to like them, but alas I just couldn't wear them comfortably for very long. They were too heavy for me.
By contrast, the Bose and Sony headphones, which feel more flimsy in comparison, I can wear for hours without issue.
I have the Sony WH1000 XM3. I disagree they feel more flimsy. The most critique I can come up with is that the clickiness of the buttons isn’t up to Apple standards. And they lack multipoint.
Also to consider, AirPods Max can be extremely well built but you still cannot pack them in a suitcase like you can the Sony or Bose, due to the shitty pouch that’s included...
Yes. So instead of spending €300 at a perfectly fine WH1000XM4 including a case and cable (and airplane adapter), I get to spend €630 on AirPods Max, €40 on a cable and probably €100 on a case.
Indeed a non issue (assuming you also own a money printer).
I’ve done some binaural recording in the past, hand built stereo speakers, (as well as experienced various surround sound systems), but I am not a serious or dedicated audiophile by any means.
That said, while spatial audio does sound different than stereo, the purported ‘surround sound’ effect is mostly lost on me (even testing just now with G’s recommendation of The Mandalorian).
I'm very much the target market for the APMs, so I read this with interest. Well, I mean, I would be, if I still got on planes.
I own a nice pair of Sennheisers with active noise cancellation. They're AMAZING on planes, or other noisy environments, but like any full-sized set of headphones they're not something I'd wear moving around. Since COVID happened, mine have been on a shelf -- if I want headphones in the house, I just use my AirPods or the older set of wired Sennheisers semi-permanently set up next to the couch.
But yeah, I'm interested in these for the post-COVID world. One thing gave me a little pause, though, prior to Gruber's piece, and that was my assumption that Apple wouldn't make it possible to use these in a wired mode at all. My Senns CAN be used that way, and it makes a big difference on a long-haul flight. If you can use your own nice headphones with the seatback system, you'll have a much nicer time, and I just assumed Apple wouldn't do that.
I'm VERY pleased to see they allowed for that: "You can use AirPods Max as wired headphones with a Lightning to 3.5 mm headphone jack cable".
There's lots of stuff I like about my wireless ANC-equipped Sennheisers, but they don't sound as good as the wired set by my couch. (I mean, no surprise; the older wired set is like $300, and the wireless ones were half that.) Additionally, the wireless ones have all the sorts of goofy interface bullshit and dodgy Bluetooth things going on that I associated with basically all non-Apple Bluetooth things.
I'd absolutely pay a premium to have wireless headphones that rival my fancy wired Sennheisers, include ANC, and operate seamlessly. That'd be a no-brainer.
But, as I said, only if travel actually becomes a thing again. ;)
I am traveling (I’m the kind of person you expect to travel in a pandemic, wear a mask!). And I have Gruber’s comparator: the Bose QC35 II. I carry mine in their case hooked to a carabiner hooked to my briefcase, so the APM’s highly exposed wrapper of a case is not my cup of tea. I can also see the utility for movies at home so I appreciate the MacBook/Apple TV problem. Those are 2 of my 3 main use cases (The other of course being VTCs like everybody else). I don’t think that I will be running out to replace my current headphones but when they get long in the tooth I might consider the second generation of this APM design. It’s not a retina MacBook where I would buy it pre-order as soon as the announcement is out. It’s a 2008 unibody MacBook. It has a compelling future but I want to see what version two is.
I also think it is super super likely that Apple is about to hit Bose and other higher-end headphones makers by surprise with how good these sound. We'll have to wait for some real world usage tests and whatnot, but most $500 headphone makers are pretty hidebound / kinda into the woo-woo world of audio. These could be pretty disruptive -- especially if, in year or two, they introduce a lower-end model (AirPods MaxSE?).
Rumors indicate an AirPods (Max?) Sport in the coming months. I'd guess that those will be a lot more competitive with the XM4s/QC35s/etc., and likely will cost $299-399. I'm interested in how they'll differ from the AirPods Max, though -- a crappier speaker? More plastic and less aluminum? I think the trouble is that the AirPods Max (to me) seem more like $350 headphones than $550 headphones, so it's difficult to imagine what they'll do to hit the price point I actually have in mind.
How can you get a spatial audio effect from a screen the size of an iPhone?
Is it that objects off screen and to the left can be heard before they enter the viewing area?
I wish these had the Ultra Wideband antenna for spatial location applications. That would have been a fun API to mess with. That, and like the reviewer said, this has to happen with the next Apple TV.
> How can you get a spatial audio effect from a screen the size of an iPhone?
The idea is that if you move your head with 5.1 surround sound the headphones will 'maintain the position' of the 5 speakers relative to the screen, which is supposed to stop breaking the immersion and makes your brain think the audio is more 3d than it is.
These are limited to 256kbps low bandwidth Bluetooth. Leave it to Apple to change prices of hifi headphones, but make what amounts to laughable input quality. Expensive toys for rich people that really don’t know any better. Just like the XDR display, which was presented as “competing with industry titans at lower price”, but that ended up as complete bullshit claim by Apple.
Sony’s competitors, however badly named, cost 350$ (before the usual discounts on Amazon and retailers), and have audio in, and support higher audio input fidelity. They still use low quality amp+dac, but still the end result is much better than this.
I get what you're saying, but I'd be very surprised if they added extra weight in these ones. They're made of solid metal and have magnets to hold the ear pads in. I imagine that's enough to account for their weight.
Maybe as an Android user, this is a thing I take for granted that just isn't really in the Apple ecosystem, but I'm used to a Chromecast and seamlessly streaming all my phone content to my TV.
So when I was reading the section about the content having to be played on an iPhone or iPad, and how he can't use it with his Apple TV... I got really confused. Can you really not just stream your mobile content to the Apple TV? Then you'd have the big screen, but you could use your phone or iPad for keeping track of your head's orientation. Or can you stream it, but not, like, configure the location of your TV or something, for the purposes of the spatial audio?
You can airplay almost all content, but I guess it doesn’t have Bluetooth 5.0 or other hardware it needs to work with the Max (there’s also no U1 chip[0], in case that could have been used to have the iphone work as a proxy or something).
Aluminum is not better than plastic. Neither is plastic better than Aluminum. What matters quality and usage.
Planes[1] without aluminum? Ouch.
Cars[2] without plastic? Ouch.
I prefer ThinkPads because the use high quality plastic chassis and keyboards. Polycarbonate, ABS or whatever doesn't matter to me. Inside the use also magnesium and aluminum. High quality plastics are better when used with skin contact, especially regarding the keyboard and mouse. I regret that phones made with polycarbonate are gone, removable back cover, Qi without glass at back and they don't shatter when you drop them like the 800 $/€ stuff from Apple or Samsung. What I don't want on my lap is a MacBook. When it get hot, that not comfortable.
TLDR
What looks good in first sight isn't good to use or in long term durability.
[1] Actually they use a lot composite material within modern planes like the B747-8, B787, A350 and so on :)
[2] Excepting the original Audi A2, a great piece of aluminum :)
PS: I've seen people buying keyboards and mice made of aluminium. I cannot imagine something more uncomfortable.
Plastic does have issues though - my wife's ThinkPad had a small piece of plastic holding the battery break. If the battery moved a little too much, the computer would shut down.
So she sent it in for service. When she got the computer back, they had replaced the entire bottom of the computer, plus replaced the battery. Great, right? Except now the bottom of the computer is a different color than the top of the computer, and the battery is a 3rd color!
It's ridiculous, but that's the thing you get with plastic. UV light changes the color over time.
> ... definitely feels like they’re intended for stationary use. Their lack of water resistance aside...
> It’d be nice if [spatial audio] worked with MacBooks... But the device that’s just begging for spatial audio support is Apple TV... It’s crazy that Apple sells a premium movie-watching set-top box and very premium movie-listening wireless headphones and they don’t work together for a premium spatial audio movie-listening experience.
So, AirPods Max are not water resistant and are heavy enough to feel intended for stationary use. Yet the two unique selling propositions of these headphones are: seamless transitions between Apple devices and spacial audio.
Seems to me, if you're not going to be using these on-the-go for comfort reasons, you also won't be benefiting from the only two unique features they offer.
Not the most positive review ever. The lack of Apple TV seems like a thing, but presumably an update is in the works.
The weight thing seems like a design decision that gives insight into the job to be don’t by these headphones, which is very much not the job(s) handled by AirPods and AirPods Pro.
Gruber is an “embedded journalist” all the way. I kind of expect him to give random bad reviews to lower priority items to build credibility for when he gushes over the M1 processor.
I’m not saying he takes orders from Cupertino but there’s no need for that. Heck, I was once a fanboy and I didn’t get freebies.
> Every other pair of over-the-ear headphones I’ve ever used feel a bit cheap in comparison, because my over-the-ear headphones have all been constructed mostly of plastic.
His comment here surprises me, because I'd have assumed Gruber knows the headphone space really well. He should check out a pair of Sennheiser HD800s or Audeze LCD series. At the high end, headphones definitely don't feel cheap. There are also plenty of models in the $500 range that don't feel cheap. In particular: headphones intended for the same use as the AirPods Max apparently are (stationary, high fidelity) usually don't feel cheap, and are also usually heavy!
The rest of the review seems fine. The AirPods Max look nice and probably sound nice; if I didn't already have a pair of LCD-2s I might buy them. But I don't need another pair of headphones unless they're designed for portability. Based on what Gruber's saying here, they are not.
As I understand it, his priorities for headphones are comfort, noise cancellation and good sound, not necessarily in that order, but comfort is a big factor, so I can see why he focused in on the weight.
If you’re looking for a solid AirPods Max review as headphones, not just as an Apple product and where it fits and yadda yadda yadda, this is not the review you want. I haven’t seen the review you want yet, but it should show up somewhere soon.
Eh I don't need that review. I'm actually interested in the portability over anything else, because I'd consider wearing these over the AirPods Pro if they were light enough. I've already "invested" too much in hifi headphones and the whole setup as it is :)
Weight isn't too much of an issue if it's made up for with lots of padding. I had a corsair void pro and "upgraded" to the corsair virtuoso. The virtuoso is aluminum construction, looks far more professional, sounds a bit better, and has better battery life, but it's much heavier AND has LESS padding. It feels like it's trying to dig into my skull in no time. They would be much better if they sacrificed a little bit of sleekness to pack much more foam in the headband.
710 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 413 ms ] threadAlso, don't knock earbuds as being innately less noise-cancelling than over-ear headphones - in-ear monitors (IEMs) that enter your ear canal and produce a good seal can passively filter a great deal of sound, musicians use them all the time and I used to wear my pair (without any active noise cancellation) on airplanes—they work at least 75% as well as Airpods Pro active cancellation does, while sounding really great.
But after a long period of listening like on a long-haul flight, the physical pressure of those get tiring on my ears... and active noise cancellation also makes my ears tired after a while too... so seems there's no silver bullet. Honestly I've just gone to not using headphones of any kind for extended periods of time and listening with speakers whenever practical.
(note that I'm not implying the QCs have poor build quality, just that a heavier product implies better BQ. I am implying that the QCs aren't difficult to beat on sound quality though)
I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only. I think noise cancellation really shines when out and about in public, like the subway. But I can't imagine anyone using those things on the go, at least not where I live.
Less safe than say Oslo, Amsterdam, Edinburgh or Copenhagen.
Basically in the middle among major European cities.
Compared to the US it is much safer than Chicago, Detroit or Atlanta and less safe than for example Denver or Boston.
If someone tells me that Östermalm is now a place where people rob you more easily than 10 years ago, then I have enough of a feeling how the social landscape changed. In Stockholm, I've experienced a couple of crime-ish situations in those 2 months that I didn't experience to such a frequent or great extent in Amsterdam (where I live).
In short: it might be that things in Stockholm have gotten a bit more sour.
It’s an isolated anecdote of which there are tens of millions of others just like it in the cities you mentioned. Crime stats should be based on up to the minute evidence not anecdotes.
I dislike reading anecdotes as evidence as well. However, sometimes I personally simply feel free enough to express myself on HN and don't think any further than that. In most cases, this is fine, but in some cases I become part of the problem (posting anecdotes that are interpreted as "evidence").
So I'm happy you posted your reaction as I feel it's the reason why I've been downvoted a couple of times as well. Upon rereading my comment, I agree with your comment. I'll try to finetune my behavior accordingly.
Sure it has a couple of dodgy areas, but I lived in Sodermalm and Kungsholmen and never felt unsafe around those, I moved from Brazil and my hometown gets as many robberies reports in a day as Stockholm gets a year.
I can understand some people might be targeted for these status items but I never had any issues moving around even with an expensive laptop, phone, headphones with me, taking the public transport every day.
These huge numbers in combination with really poor integration has lead to a very segregated society. You now read about gang shootings, rapes, humiliation robberies (they rob the victims then piss them in the mouth or cut off an ear or so, just for fun). These things are happening daily now, it used to be maybe once a year you read about a shooting or particular nasty rape/robbery.
Oh my god.... And then I realise last time I was there it was before GFC. This is very sad to hear / read.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kpRVk9KOmo
https://www.economist.com/europe/2020/11/28/why-sweden-strug...
https://www.economist.com/europe/2020/11/28/why-sweden-strug...
https://www.thelocal.se/20200923/the-situation-right-now-is-...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50339977
and realize Police simply lets criminals walk free without charges.
Remember Gizmondo? Failed mobile device startup from around 2005 that turned out to be a big scam? You might remember famous Ferrari Enzo crash in LA https://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-ferrari28feb28-story.htm... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gizmondo That was part of Swedish mafia.
https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-r...
Not sure how it is remotely relevant to life today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden#Birthplace_of_p...
Is this recent enough?
Heck in 2018 they passed a law that says "Any sex act which does not have explicit consent is rape"[0] including those where there are no threats, coercion or violence of any kind.
I mockingly considered creating a "consent" app which could be signed with BankID.
Sweden is also unique in that it counts every offence as an occurrence of rape- meaning that if you're "raped by your husband 12 times a year" those are 12 separate cases of rape and not 1 (like it would be in the UK).
There is also speculation that in Sweden they take rape reports very seriously, which leads to more people coming forward with cases of rape.
This line of thinking has been discussed before, sadly by the extreme far right.[1]
[0]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44230786
[1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39056786
I'm unsure if I'm reading the way you worded this incorrectly or not.
Are you saying people who are too scared to say no are only included because the definition is "incredibly broad"?! Do you think people too scared to say no shouldn't be included?
If so, I'd argue you must have a very narrow personal definition, which worries me.
However I'm saying that the definition of rape in Sweden is broader than other countries and encompasses more things, so the same action in the UK could be classified as domestic violence or sexual harassment (thus, not rape) but in Sweden it would be rape.
For one (of many) example(s), in the UK it's impossible for a woman to rape a man, because legally the perpetrator needs to penetrate the victim. This is not the case in Sweden.
So 'rape' is the crime that's really not worthy of easy comparison between nations.
Like if you were a grad student, literally doing a thesis on it - ok, but otherwise, it's just a chunky one.
Look, if there are people there's gonna be crime. That's just the way it goes. But as far as moderately large cities go, Stockholm is far from dangerous. Like anywhere else some areas will be worse than others, but the parts being discussed in these comments – the inner city – are not the favelas these people seem to claim. Stockholm is a perfectly fine city, but haters gonna hate and all that I guess.
Thugs getting off too easy though, now that's a real thing.
I would definitely not wear 500-600 USD headphones in any of those areas.
But I think crime in Stockholm is a bit off topic. However I don't think the inherent risk of being robbed - wherever you are in the world - is off topic for the discussion.
People rob kids of Airpods all the time, because it's a status item. These new Airpods will be a status item too. This will increase the risk of robbery - be it in Europe or the US or elsewhere.
I'm sure there are larger cities in the world where the likelihood of getting robbed is low (Tokyo?), but that'd be the exception rather than the norm.
I would say that the risk of being robbed in any of the mentioned areas is very low, even during night-time (if you don't actively are looking for trouble)
I used to live in a very dodgy part of Spain near Gibraltar. I was never mugged or beaten up. I've been told by people "You look like you can handle yourself". Some of work collegues which were skinner, more fresh faced got robbed, beaten and in one case had what they believe to be a gun pulled on them. I never had any problems. I don't look like an easy target due to my appearence and size, those guys unfortunately do due to their size and appearence.
https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/y3G4Pg/polisen-varnar-k...
On top of that, tech doesn't have nearly the same resell value as high-end watches.
I have always thought Stockholm as somewhat safer than ( Greater) London in my book.
Some peoples' perception is entirely driven by watching too much local news, and yet they somehow convince themselves they or their friends have personally have experienced all of this. Hook them up to a lie detector and it would draw a perfectly flat line as they spin their tales.
A discussion about Sweden and you couldn't help yourself huh.
I don’t follow.
A flat line on a polygraph (whose accuracy is a debate for another time) would indicate they are telling the truth, or rather that they believe to be doing so.
I get that you’re claiming their perception of reality is skewed, but deriding people for saying what they genuinely believe to be true is odd.
It's the reason why boomers swear they were present at every major event during their lifetimes, as though we're surrounded by Forrest Gumps.
That sentence appears to argue that you think them passing the polygraph is a bad thing—why make the comment otherwise—which doesn’t make sense to me. It doesn’t affect your larger argument, but it doesn’t support it either and thus stood out. It’s as if you had ended your post with “bananas are radioactive”—true, but I’d be left wondering why you had felt the need to mention it.
If that answer doesn't satisfy you then call it observational humor regarding urban & suburban neuroses. Not really sure what you're driving at otherwise.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45269764
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50339977
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden#Birthplace_of_p...
The vast majority of the immigrants is also men which has skewed the male/female ratio in certain age groups.
The violence we see now is mainly from second-generation immigrants because they have no real connection with their home country and they have no real connection with Sweden either since they have grown up in areas where there are no Swedes.
These aimless young men + a system that have failed them + a fast growing gangster culture that promises money and respect + no real consequences for young criminals (4years max for murder, rape is a couple of months maybe if anything at all) leads to a very fast growing criminal networks / gangs.
The gangs now also have an endless supply of young men willing to do whatever it takes since we a constantly taking in more people even thou the system is showing no signs of being better at integration people.
I wanna be very clear thou, this is not due to race/skin-color or other racist bullshit, it is simply input vs output, ANY system in the known universe that gets overburden crashes or starts behaving in unfavourable ways and that is where we are now.
Atleast that part of your claims is wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_area
The page shows how they have evolved since 2015 but if you go back to 2000 or so, they were just a handful.
Basically, the immigration has been larger than the society can "organically" integrate, and the result are new structures in society which did not exist before.
136 robberies of expensive watches in an area with 2.3 million people. Of them 64 happened in the city proper (1 million people).
Yeah, "it's just a matter of time".
Got it.
Open plan office spaces and public transport, including airplanes ;-)
Outside, that's a different story.
WFH kids, dogs etc. AirPods pro help a lot with that situation for me.
Mostly because criminals know that the resale of apple goods is entirely on the parts, which is not worth much.
Isn't that mostly due to activation lock? Is there any kind of similar mechanism for the AirPods Max?
FYI here are some examples of why I swear by my noise cancellation headphones while working from home during a pandemic in a densely populated city:
- Washing machine and dishwasher running cycles during the day - The fridge vibrating at higher frequencies (don't know much about fridge mechanics but this soemthing fridges to do maintain a certain temperature) - Other people in the household talking, cooking, making coffee, fetching cutlery and plates etc. - The high decible hum of delivery scooters/mopeds usually accelerating much faster than they should in what is supposed to be a quiet road - Road noise from delivery vehicles which are heavier than your typical car
(ps admittedly the last two points are only a problem when I have the windows open but occassionaly someone revs an engine which can be heard through the windows)
- During summer months with the windows open, passers' by can be heard from my desk. I live on just off a "quiet road" in my city, my desk is on the first floor and is on the other side of the room from the road. Yet people's conversations are loud enough to make a noise.
Individually there is little wrong with these sounds (except maybe mopeds which I wish were quieter) but collectively they cause noises during working hours for which I am grateful to have noise cancelling headphones at home.
PS I guess Apple are also targeting people who will take these to the office eventually.
I've had mine 7 years and swear by them.
Sadly, you can't (realistically) wear them in bed while you sleep.
https://www.bose.com/en_us/products/wellness/noise_masking_s...
“Unlike headphones, Sleepbuds™ don't stream music or podcasts. They play content only from the Bose Sleep app.”
The original AirPods weren't, but the Pro are, at least for me.
If you recall, the early iPhones were stolen the lot until Apple tied the devices to the Apple ID. This allowed you to lock the device and make it a worthless piece of hardware when the owner wanted it to be.
In principle, with all the electronics on the AirPods, one could imagine a situation where they are locked to an Apple ID and if they are stolen they could be locked down. This would dramatically lower the resale value and prevent future thefts if Apple were to implement this.
- With the assistance of a friend, I rebuilt my kitchen. He swore by his AirPod Pros, I dealt with hours of tablesaws and sanding with foam in my ears.
- Then my building owners jackhammered apart the rooftop overhead in an asbestos removal project.
Now I’m thanking my AirPod Pro every time my neighbor’s baby wakes up at night.
But when it happens in Sweden, do they call it “Stockholm syndrome”?
Some of us have kids banging around the house all day.
I never wear headphones when walking/biking etc, but I’ve worn mine pretty much non-srop at home for the past year. The computer fan, neighborhood noices, fridge, all is quieter and the music is better. I focus better.
Where they really have shown themselves to be indispensible though is on my 2h30 roundtrip daily commute by train[1], complete bliss.
[1] On hold since March..
Somehow I feel like the audio quality and build quality is not going to be as good as the companies that actually make headphones for a living.
Edit: Also, the fact that these don't fold, and that they're supposedly for using in public, make these even less attractive.
https://macdailynews.com/2018/11/05/apple-is-the-worlds-lead... (2018): “When its three headphone brand categories are combined (EarPods, AirPods, Beats – an Apple company) Apple has the leading market share in headphone ownership with 24%. Sony is second with 22%, followed by fellow traditional CE stalwarts Panasonic and Bose”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-27/apple-ced...: “The AirPods have come to define the true wireless (TWS) earphones category, with Apple accounting for nearly half of all sales in 2019 and expected to grow to 82 million units this year, according to Counterpoint Research data. More affordable alternatives from Chinese rivals, however, have eroded Apple’s lead and the Silicon Valley company now finds itself with just over a third of the market, at 35%”
Audio quality? Maybe not. Although it probably depends on how you precisely define audio quality. I’m not aware of any competing headphones that have a feature equivalent to the directional audio that these AirPods have.
But build quality? Apple will give any remotely comparable product a run for its money. Very few companies can match Apple’s expertise when it comes to mass producing hardware products with high-end materials and matching build quality. I think it’s close to a certainty that any headphones that are undeniably nicer than these ones, will also be significantly more expensive.
AirPods are better than EarPods, but they're still in $25 earphone range.
AirPods Pro are nice, but you can get wired IEMs for <$100 that sound just as good. In that price range you can get Pinnacle P1 ($200) or ER4XR ($250) which dump all over them. I use AirPods Pro daily, not for quality, but for convenience.
HomePod is probably the biggest disappointment I've ever heard. $300 and it sounds like a plastic box, despite "computational audio".
At $550, you're solidly in headphone big leagues. Beyer DT770 or DT990 are close to perfect and they're <$200. Beyond that point you're hitting diminishing returns in audio quality; double price is going to get tiny marginal improvements in quality.
I'm eager to hear them but I can't imagine them outperforming DT990s, despite costing twice as much.
(Yes, none of these options have bluetooth or ANC. Get an ES100 for BT. If noise is a problem, get IEMs or AirPods Pro.)
Who knows whether or not I am right or not? What I am quite certain of, is that I'm not likely unique when it comes to not being able to appreciate the small differences in quality that cost the most. Which is to say that for me and a lot of other people, it seems pointless to get hung up on whether one pair of very good headphones sound marginally better than another pair of very good headphones. Unless you're working in a studio as a sound producer, at a certain point the audio quality simply ceases to be the most important attribute of a pair of headphones. I don't know if it's true that you can get a pair of wired IEMs that sound better than the AirPods Pro, but even if it is, it's irrelevant, because the AirPods Pro sound fine to most people who buy them.
Through the years I've owned several different brands of headphones in the price range $100–$150 that I bought because reviewers claimed they were extraordinarily good value for the money when it came to sound quality. And maybe they were, but I've hated most of them for getting mostly everything else wrong: Wrong length of wire, wrong placement of microphone and buttons, and just horrible build quality.
I use the AirPods Pro not because they sound the best, but because they sound good enough and the convenience factors make them worthwhile.
I dump on the HomePod because it lacks any convenience factors that are meaningful to me [1] and it doesn't even serve the "speaker that sounds good" purpose [2].
So I really want to know what the value prop for AirPods Max is. They're not convenient or useful for travel because they're too big. They're not "best audio quality", because that's been done at lower price points. Spatial audio and ANC? Already solved, better, by AirPods Pro, at half the price. They're not even usable for critical listening or gaming because of Bluetooth.
So what are they for? Fashion? (Nothing wrong with that, but I'm sure as hell not going to spend $550 for it.)
[1] Siri can't understand me and it false triggers constantly.
[2] It wasn't even like, "hey its good but there are better speakers". They sounded like a cheap plastic box. They were better than my $100 Google Home. They're worse than the $120 soundbar I put on a TV. It's a low bar.
Almost every other pair of headphones in this price range offers replaceable headbands, and many of them can be customized with off the shelf products.
It's never going to touch your ears anyway, but your fingers might stay glued to them if it's freezing.
Btw, I wonder how they will let people try them in the stores. Seems like putting something on your head/ears that others have tried before you feels a little icky.
I mostly use bottom end Airpods though because they are more convenient and sound just as good!
All that to say -- I'd think all things being equal, good-quality plastic & lighter would be the way to go.
He complains it's too heavy, but then puts down other, lighter products made out of plastic.
He also puts down using it wired, even though it seems like a product to use at your desk (since it's heavy and doesn't have water resistance). Keep in mind, an audio cable is not included in the box, so maybe Apple is sending a signal to use it wirelessly.
Also, he doesn't think this device needs an off switch. This means you get to carry around the case just to put your device in standby. The case is an elaborate off button since it doesn't offer much protection.
Well, yeah? That makes perfect sense, doesn't it? Metal ones are going to feel more solid and reliable than plastic, but will be heavier.
It is, because it tells product designers that there is a gap in the market that no one is serving, and that they could release a product to fill that void.
And it's working.
He says they are not meant for use as wired headphones primarily, so recommends against them if thats what you want. Seems reasonable.
Regarding the Switch he says: "I’m not saying they should, but it’s very Apple-like that they don’t." To me it seems like he is staying neutral on the need for an off Switch right now - just commenting that he's not surprised.
I don't think they are bad takes. They are tepid takes at worst!
It's in fact possible to list the pros and cons of something so the reader can decide for themselves which matter to them without forcing a specific opinion onto the reader.
it's almost like he's describing various pros and cons so that the reader can decide which of those things matter to them.
Hearing about the rumors of Apple headphones I postponed any purchase, as I was curious to see first what these headphones would be like and quite willing to buy them, even if more expensive than what I had before. So why arent the AirPods Max not an instant buy for me now?
First of all, the release 2 weeks before Christmas is odd timing, but that probably was beyond the control by Apple, they were not ready for production early enough, also this means limited stock. Basically the question was already decided as there was no chance to get them with the initial run and now are out of stock till spring.
A rather big gripe of mine are the colors. It is great to have different colors, buy why are they all so toned down? For the same reason I don't like the identical colors of the iPad Air. For some things I really like the colors to be ff0000 or 0000ff, alternatively at least 000000. I would like to see whether the "space gray" is dark enough, in the video by iJustine they looked nice, would like to check that out in a store before ordering.
The other one would be the rather weird case. Not only is it odd and I really don't need a case for my headphones in the first place, it is also mandatory to use to be able to switch them off. Which is probably the reason I won't get them. I don't want to have to put my headphones in a case every time I put them off for more than a very short while. Especially not in a goofy one. There needs to be an off switch on the device. Shouldn't be difficult to reprogram one of the two switches to work that way.
The other one is of course the issue with the device compatibility. As Gruber points it out: the spatial audio is great, but there seems no way to actually use this. I am not going to watch movies on my iPhone (I actually did this once to test my Homepods as a movie sound stage, which worked great. But I did it exactly once for satisfying the curiosity, watching a movie on the iPhone is no experience I want to replicate). This is a huge stinker and I don't know what Apple is thinking. It is already more than aggravating, that you cannot (reasonably) use Homepods as your Mac speakers. I just set up a new MacBook Pro, and indeed, my Homepods appear als sound output devices in the audio control, but as separate devices. How is it possible, that they don't communicate their pairing to Macs? Again, what is Apple thinking?
As a consequence, I am quite undecided yet. They do tick quite a few boxes, good build quality, probably great sound, Apple certainly has used all their vast acoustic skills on those. Battery and earpads are exchangeable, they should have a good life time. The price certainly gave me a short pause, this is not impulse by territory. I would be willing to pay it though for a product I am convinced about.
I tend to disagree. Most people underestimate good passive isolation and have never tried good closed back headphones.
Just spend $99 on Sennheiser HD280PRO, try them on a flight trip and make your own decision.
I've had good closed headphones before, and they're... okay... but nothing like a good active noise cancelling headphones.
For example, the Sony WH-1000XM3 is already a relatively good closed headphone! If you put one on with the noise cancelling disabled, it still provides a quite decent amount of isolation. But then instant you press that little switch... near total silence.
I used to tell people that first class tickets on planes are a waste of money because: You're still on a plane, it's still noisy, you just get better food.
But now with my Sony headphones, cattle class feels like first class. It's bliss: I can sleep. I can watch movies and actually understand what people are saying. I can read a book without feeling like there's a running hair dryer behind my head the whole time. The cries of babies are completely inaudible.
You get much more leg room. You are getting much more space than an economy.
Now, business class or whatever they call the thing where you can recline your seat almost horizontally, that's something. I can't really sleep sitting.
Depending on the configuration you may have a real (narrow) bed feeling, or you may be lying in a sort of tube with not much space to move, but definitely completely flat.
If the price is not outrageous I always go for a business flight on long haul.
Absurd means in the 6000$ range from Europe to Asia and I agree that's over the top compared to, say, 700$ economy with a reasonable airline.
Then again upgrading is an option and sometimes really great bargains can be found.
I flew Zurich Bangkok return with Oman Air in business for less than 2'000 in February. In my opinion a very reasonable price for a great product.
Also funny how you yourself come up with the ridiculous salary of $500k, something ~nobody here will ever make, as the amount that finally makes $3k sound trivial to you. I agree with that much. That's the salary that would make me finally consider paying $3k for leg room.
You need to be level 7+ in a FAANG anywhere else in the world to make anything near that. And you definitely won't be there with "a bit of Javascript".
It is not. It is a great Bluetooth/NC headphone but certainly not a good closed one compared to other closed back phones specifically built for passive isolation. It is also targeted at consumers.
Have you actually tried the HD280PRO I specifically talked about? It is a professional headphone that is very popular with drummers for a reason.
I own the xm3, i own the Beyerdynamic DT770 which is way more popular with studios and drummers; passive isolation vs ANC is not even a discussion
But maybe this is just me :-)
1. Buy a good pair of closed back headphones 2. Take them on a flight 3. Make your choice
If AFTER you have done this, you still prefer NC (and are willing to pay it) then fine by me.
You also get more legroom and a less cramped seat.
If you're flying "only" five hours this may not be a big deal. If you're flying >10 hours (e.g., across the Pacific), then it can make a huge difference to comfort.
First is nice when I get upgraded, but I'd rather take say Qatar Business than BA first.
That said, the headphones I has on a US Airways Business from Manchester to Philidelphia were amazing - far better than the BA ones, so much that I bought a pair (QC25s) while I was in the States.
What with 2020 I haven't been on a plane for over a year now, and I've been on 3 trips on a train, so I've basically forgotten what "out and about" headphones are like. I do wear one on my ear if I'm watching something in bed (hook over ear). Never seen any wireless ones, fortunately I haven't downgraded from my iphone SE so can still use them.
Yes: for some reason I missed "first".
The upgrade to at least business is probably worth it (budget permitting) for flights ≥8 hours, but going to first is probably diminishing returns.
Whenever I tried using noise cancelling headphones, I always felt what I can only describe as a high air pressure in my ears. The best I can describe it is the feeling of needing to pop my ears but popping them providing zero relief.
Is this common at all? Does everyone feel this but somehow are able to ignore it?
Anyway fully agree that good passive isolation goes a long way!
If you fall into this camp, then passive isolation is the only viable choice for you.
https://www.soundstagesolo.com/index.php/features/178-eardru...
Earbuds don't tend to exhibit it nearly as much as headphones.
I feel pressure almost immediately but it doesn't the level of even mild discomfort until 7-8 hours of continuous use (my employer provides a pair that have an ANC option). Even then I can deal with it for longer if I'm watching a movie or something after work.
also if you already have earbuds that you like but they don't give you enough isolation, you can always wear earbuds under construction earmuffs, which is what I was doing before getting the Vic Firth isolation headphones.
Interestingly the AirPods Pro are explicitly engineered to avoid this, and I don’t have this problem with them.
I wonder what the deal is with the Airpods Max?
Passive isolation most noticeably outperforms noise-cancelling for transient noises.
And the sound quality is really excellent for the price.
Nice Sennheiser over-ear cans are okay on a plane, but honestly aren't as good as solid in-ear options (e.g., Etymotic).
Sennheisers (or others) with ANC that are also over ear are FAR AND AWAY superior. It's astonishing how nice it is for the drone of the plane to just VANISH vs. being merely muffled.
Is your claim that Sennheiser HD280PRO headphones do a better job than these? Because I've got a pair, and I agree 100% with the author: the first time I tried some noise-canceling headphones was the last time I took my HD280PROs on a flight.
If that's not your claim, then it doesn't seem like your statement makes any sense.
Sure, HD280PROs are better than not wearing anything over your ears. But the flying experience is dramatically different once you have active noise-cancelling headphones, so different that, euphemistically speaking, there's no going back.
As a motorcyclist the weight of a helmet is a real concern usually rivaling the safety rating but always higher than airflow which itself is high on the list.
I really do not see myself wearing any set of headphones that weigh this much, the XM4s by Sony are noticeable so weighing half again more has to really stand out. That he emphasized their inertia pretty much eliminates them completely.
I still really feel that the team involved here reached a ship it or shelve deadline after four years of development. Even the case looks like a last minute tie in which reveals two other sore points, they don't fold and they don't have a means to turn them off outside the case.
I missed that one. I'll revisit them when they release the S/Pro/Max version.
Just saved future me a cool 500 quid, cheers John!
I don't even like wearing earbuds on a forest path. I really can't imagine over the ear headphones around a city, even sitting in public transit.
Not Airpods, but I wouldn't be surprised if Airpods offered similar qualities.
https://hearinghealthmatters.org/hearingnewswatch/2020/airpo...
In both cases those 'transparency modes' do filter out a bit of useless noise, and I do feel a bit more 'aware' of things/people outside me with that mode on. I've often thought that's also at least partially because I intentionally switch to that mode for a reason (then switch back to full noise cancelling when done).
I live in a busy hipster neighborhood that’s also a major traffic hub... and I like it. I’m a city rat. The music is supposed to come with the roar of cars at a green light and the dozens of half heard conversations on busy sidewalks.
I have the-cheapest-model Sennheiser open airs and a with-mic-for-Zoom-calls JBL. The JBL absolutely isolates the environment mechanically. This is good for a meeting (except for the fact that you hear your voice from your skull, but heck.)
The original Walkman came with headphones [1], but they were light and fluffy. For a long time after, the trend was toward lighter, smaller. People wearing large headphones out and about are definitely a later wave.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2014/7/1/5861062/sony-walkman-at-35
People have worn on-ear headphones since the early days of Sony Walkmans. Y'know, this kind: https://retrospekt.com/products/retro-orange-headphones
Wearing over-ear headphones in public wasn't really a thing until Beats and such came into fashion in the last 15 years or so.
Basically you have two axis:
Size/Fit: Earbuds and myriad variations; Supra-aural (on ear), circumaural (over the ear)
Isolation: Circumaural/over-the-ear can be open-back or closed-back; and they can have various degrees of noise isolation and cancellation.
As for the look and age, it's really a subjective perspective - I personally feel I'm old enough not to care about wearing over-the-ear outside :D
We've got the ocean, got the babes
Got the sun, we've got the waves
The mountains and the rain
And high-speed train
Why would you live anywhere else
Sweat corrodes stuff.
If you took public transportation or go any place young people hang out you would see them too. (Malls or coffee shops)
All the wireless buds used to be those ones that were strung together at max wirelessness
This has always surprised my as someone who's owned a couple of pairs of B&W P-series headphones (P5 then PX). Portable headphones should be built to last, not just flimsy plastic. B&W got it right with metal construction (and with the newest PX models forged carbon fibre), no surprises Apple is building robust headphones too.
What B&W provide though, is a really solid benchmark (of many) (with the exception of spatial audio - which from Gruber sounds like it still has some shortcomings to overcome). They're £200 cheaper, really substantial and solid construction (with a proper hard carrying case - although similar limited folding), the newest carbon models will be noticeably lighter (if still a substantial 310g).
Obviously the Sony XM4s and Bose 700s are well in view too (although plastic construction can make them seem a less premium alternative).
I expect these will sell relatively well, but I can't see them flying off the shelves like their in-ear namesakes in such a crowded and competitive market, even with Apple's software bonuses.
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/12/08/airpods-max-shipping-es...
Good plastic is not flimsy.
Polycarbonate, an almost commodity plastic, is really strong and light. The next step: composites are way better than any metal if you want a good strength-to-weight ratio. The best, most expensive bikes are made out of carbon fiber composite for a reason.
Plastic is commonly used as casing material for stuff designed for rough environments. Portable power tools, PA speakers, even guns. So if something designed to be used on the battlefield can be made of plastic, there is no problem for headphones worn, at worst, in the subway.
The only problem with plastic is that it suffers from being cheap, as in, not expensive enough. People want expensive products to be made of expensive materials. Also, subconsciously we associate weight with quality, so much that cheap manufacturers sometimes add metal inserts to their otherwise low quality products to trick people into thinking they are better than they really are.
That it to say, unless you put a premium on look and feel (nothing wrong with that), don't hesitate to buy plastic headphones, they can last you a lifetime as long as the right plastic is used at the right place.
That said, the B&W v-shaped sound is not my favorite. Not unlistenable, but maybe not what I'd choose again.
However those cans don't have bluetooth, noise cancelling, a microphone nor adaptive EQing. They're literally just a high quality speaker, headband and copper wiring.
By contrast, the Bose and Sony headphones, which feel more flimsy in comparison, I can wear for hours without issue.
Also to consider, AirPods Max can be extremely well built but you still cannot pack them in a suitcase like you can the Sony or Bose, due to the shitty pouch that’s included...
It's a non-issue.
Indeed a non issue (assuming you also own a money printer).
That said, while spatial audio does sound different than stereo, the purported ‘surround sound’ effect is mostly lost on me (even testing just now with G’s recommendation of The Mandalorian).
Am I missing something here?
I own a nice pair of Sennheisers with active noise cancellation. They're AMAZING on planes, or other noisy environments, but like any full-sized set of headphones they're not something I'd wear moving around. Since COVID happened, mine have been on a shelf -- if I want headphones in the house, I just use my AirPods or the older set of wired Sennheisers semi-permanently set up next to the couch.
But yeah, I'm interested in these for the post-COVID world. One thing gave me a little pause, though, prior to Gruber's piece, and that was my assumption that Apple wouldn't make it possible to use these in a wired mode at all. My Senns CAN be used that way, and it makes a big difference on a long-haul flight. If you can use your own nice headphones with the seatback system, you'll have a much nicer time, and I just assumed Apple wouldn't do that.
I'm VERY pleased to see they allowed for that: "You can use AirPods Max as wired headphones with a Lightning to 3.5 mm headphone jack cable".
There's lots of stuff I like about my wireless ANC-equipped Sennheisers, but they don't sound as good as the wired set by my couch. (I mean, no surprise; the older wired set is like $300, and the wireless ones were half that.) Additionally, the wireless ones have all the sorts of goofy interface bullshit and dodgy Bluetooth things going on that I associated with basically all non-Apple Bluetooth things.
I'd absolutely pay a premium to have wireless headphones that rival my fancy wired Sennheisers, include ANC, and operate seamlessly. That'd be a no-brainer.
But, as I said, only if travel actually becomes a thing again. ;)
I also think it is super super likely that Apple is about to hit Bose and other higher-end headphones makers by surprise with how good these sound. We'll have to wait for some real world usage tests and whatnot, but most $500 headphone makers are pretty hidebound / kinda into the woo-woo world of audio. These could be pretty disruptive -- especially if, in year or two, they introduce a lower-end model (AirPods MaxSE?).
Is it that objects off screen and to the left can be heard before they enter the viewing area?
I wish these had the Ultra Wideband antenna for spatial location applications. That would have been a fun API to mess with. That, and like the reviewer said, this has to happen with the next Apple TV.
I don’t know if Bluetooth has a profile that supports surround sound. Maybe the spatial audio only works on devices with the U1 chip.
The idea is that if you move your head with 5.1 surround sound the headphones will 'maintain the position' of the 5 speakers relative to the screen, which is supposed to stop breaking the immersion and makes your brain think the audio is more 3d than it is.
Sony’s competitors, however badly named, cost 350$ (before the usual discounts on Amazon and retailers), and have audio in, and support higher audio input fidelity. They still use low quality amp+dac, but still the end result is much better than this.
Where is this info form, btw? I'd love to read more specs. BT5 has a 2Mbit throughput for LE.
Seriously. Opus is close to transparent already at 128kbps.
There’s more to it, perhaps.
The ecosystem integration, materials are apparently above the plastic-y norm, the just works without fiddling with EQ...
Oh and buying them is not compulsory. Really very little reason to even login to post this, given reality on the whole.
Thanks for sharing I guess. Not sure how salty hot takes make HN “better” than Reddit. The rules mean nothing.
It will be interesting to see the teardown video.
So when I was reading the section about the content having to be played on an iPhone or iPad, and how he can't use it with his Apple TV... I got really confused. Can you really not just stream your mobile content to the Apple TV? Then you'd have the big screen, but you could use your phone or iPad for keeping track of your head's orientation. Or can you stream it, but not, like, configure the location of your TV or something, for the purposes of the spatial audio?
0: https://9to5mac.com/2020/12/08/apple-didnt-include-its-u1-ch...
Planes[1] without aluminum? Ouch.
Cars[2] without plastic? Ouch.
I prefer ThinkPads because the use high quality plastic chassis and keyboards. Polycarbonate, ABS or whatever doesn't matter to me. Inside the use also magnesium and aluminum. High quality plastics are better when used with skin contact, especially regarding the keyboard and mouse. I regret that phones made with polycarbonate are gone, removable back cover, Qi without glass at back and they don't shatter when you drop them like the 800 $/€ stuff from Apple or Samsung. What I don't want on my lap is a MacBook. When it get hot, that not comfortable.
TLDR What looks good in first sight isn't good to use or in long term durability.
[1] Actually they use a lot composite material within modern planes like the B747-8, B787, A350 and so on :)
[2] Excepting the original Audi A2, a great piece of aluminum :)
PS: I've seen people buying keyboards and mice made of aluminium. I cannot imagine something more uncomfortable.
So she sent it in for service. When she got the computer back, they had replaced the entire bottom of the computer, plus replaced the battery. Great, right? Except now the bottom of the computer is a different color than the top of the computer, and the battery is a 3rd color!
It's ridiculous, but that's the thing you get with plastic. UV light changes the color over time.
> It’d be nice if [spatial audio] worked with MacBooks... But the device that’s just begging for spatial audio support is Apple TV... It’s crazy that Apple sells a premium movie-watching set-top box and very premium movie-listening wireless headphones and they don’t work together for a premium spatial audio movie-listening experience.
So, AirPods Max are not water resistant and are heavy enough to feel intended for stationary use. Yet the two unique selling propositions of these headphones are: seamless transitions between Apple devices and spacial audio.
Seems to me, if you're not going to be using these on-the-go for comfort reasons, you also won't be benefiting from the only two unique features they offer.
The weight thing seems like a design decision that gives insight into the job to be don’t by these headphones, which is very much not the job(s) handled by AirPods and AirPods Pro.
I’m not saying he takes orders from Cupertino but there’s no need for that. Heck, I was once a fanboy and I didn’t get freebies.
His comment here surprises me, because I'd have assumed Gruber knows the headphone space really well. He should check out a pair of Sennheiser HD800s or Audeze LCD series. At the high end, headphones definitely don't feel cheap. There are also plenty of models in the $500 range that don't feel cheap. In particular: headphones intended for the same use as the AirPods Max apparently are (stationary, high fidelity) usually don't feel cheap, and are also usually heavy!
The rest of the review seems fine. The AirPods Max look nice and probably sound nice; if I didn't already have a pair of LCD-2s I might buy them. But I don't need another pair of headphones unless they're designed for portability. Based on what Gruber's saying here, they are not.
If you’re looking for a solid AirPods Max review as headphones, not just as an Apple product and where it fits and yadda yadda yadda, this is not the review you want. I haven’t seen the review you want yet, but it should show up somewhere soon.