Beats Solo² Headphones Sound Great, But You"re Paying for Fashion - Webmaster News

New Post has been published on http://www.outils-webmaster.eu/beats-solo%c2%b2-headphones-sound-great-but-youre-paying-for-fashion/

Beats

Mashable Choice highlights the products and services we’ve tested and would recommend to others. Consider it Liked, Favorited, +1′ed and Pinned.

It’s a big week for Beats. Not only is Apple buying the company for $3 billion, but Beats just announced the successor to its best-selling Solo headphones, the Solo2.

Beats says it sold four pairs of Solos every minute in 2013 — making it one of the most successful headphone models ever. With the Solo2, Beats is focused on making the iconic smaller on-ear headphones even better.

Like 2013′s Beats Studio and Beats Studio Wireless headphones, the Solo2 have been redesigned from the inside-out to have a wider range of sound, better clarity and a more streamlined design.

The Solo2 headphones look right at home next to the 2013 Beats Studio and Studio Wireless models. The Solo2 are available in black, white, red, blue, gray and pink. They’ll cost $199.99, available for pre-order at www.beatsbydre.com today and will be widely available at retailers and online on June 1.

You gotta hand it to Beats, the company knows how to make beautiful headphones. The Solo2 are some of the most attractive smaller-cup earphones I’ve seen.

The overall design is very similar to the original Solo and Solo HD headphones, but the curves and lines are more streamlined to match the changes to the Beats Studio line. That means there are no visible screws — which makes these look more like a premium design.

Beats has done a great job with the color and paint finish on the Solo2. We received a sample in gray — which really looks more like a slate blue — that are just stunning. The paint is glossy, but at least in this color, they are not fingerprint magnets.

One of my favorite touches is that the headphone cable matches the headphones exactly. If you buy the Solo2 in black, you get the standard red Beats cable, but every other pair feature a matching 3.5mm jack.

The headband is curved at the center — which is supposed to allow for a more custom fit. The headband itself is metal and can extend as needed. I’ve had more than one pair of Monster-era Beats snap in half at the headband — in one case without ever even leaving my office. I haven’t had time to fully stress-test the Solo2, but it feels much less likely to snap in half.

Image: Mashable, Christina Ascani

Like most Beats, the Solo2 can fold up to be quite compact. The folding hinge feels secure. The only thing to be aware of is the snapping noise that emits every time you fold up the phones. The noise, coupled with how light the headphones feel might make you think you broke something. You didn’t. The hinge is just a little loud.

Although I would feel totally comfortable tossing the Solo2 while folded into a purse or into a compartment or pocket in a messenger bag, it comes with a neoprene headphone case. This is nice if you want a little more protection, particularly if your bag doesn’t have sections or pockets.

The Solo2 earcups are now made from the same material as the Studio and Studio Wireless headphones. It’s plush and soft, and the material is designed to let heat out but keep sound in. For the most part, it achieves both of those goals. If you’re pumping music at a high volume, some sound might leak through, but this is minimal.

As for heat, the pads are breathable, but I still noticed that my ears were warmer while wearing the Solo2 than other headphones of this size.

I attribute that heat with the smaller size of the cups. Because the Solo2 cups are smaller than what you find on the Studio line, the fit can be pretty tight. I have a small head, but still found my ears hurting after wearing the phones for a few hours.

Adjusting the band at the top helps a bit — but it’s still a bit too snug for comfort. After I’ve had more time to break them in that will probably improve, but the phones are tight.

I did find that adjusting the position of the band — and where the cups sit — can make a big difference on the overall comfort and tightness. The only problem is, at least for my head, that takes a bit more fiddling than what I normally do for on-ear headphones.

Although I hasten to call myself an audiophile, I must confess to being one of those annoying audio snobs who claims to be able to hear things she probably actually can’t. I’ve also managed to amass lots of headphones and even more inner-ear monitors over the years.

I’m taking those experiences — and in some cases, straight-up comparisons — to evaluate the sound of the Solo2.

Amongst audiophiles and audio snobs like me, Beats don’t have the best reputation — especially in its price range. The Monster-era Beats were famous for being far too heavy on the bass and offering distorted, muddled sound for other types of music.

That quality, coupled with the premium price and the iffy build quality made it hard to love Beats. Fortunately, Beats was listening. At the end of 2012, Beats ended its partnership with Monster and started transitioning to building its headphones in-house.

Image: Mashable, Christina Ascani

Last fall, Beats introduced redesigned versions of the Beats Studio and Studio Wireless over-ear headphones, engineered for better sound. I got a review pair of the Studio Wireless Bluetooth headphones earlier this year and I must say, I was blown away by the difference in quality compared to the Monster-era Beats Studio model.

In fact, if I’m being honest, the Studio Wireless are my current favorite Bluetooth over-ear headphones. The noise cancellation isn’t quite as good as the Bose QuietComforts, but I like them better overall.

Because I was so impressed by the turnaround with the Studio line, I went into reviewing the Solo2 with high hopes.

The good news: the sound quality is much better than the Solo or Solo HD. Yes, Beats are still tuned to be more bass-heavy, but that no longer means other types of music are hard to listen to. The overall range is much better and there is a lot more clarity, especially for string instruments.

The reality check: Even though the sound is much improved, you can still get better-sounding headphones for $200.

While checking out the Solo2, I listened to a variety of music genres on my Mac, my home audio receiver and on my iPhone 5S. I also listen to both lossless high-fidelity recordings at 24-bit/96kHz, lossy MP3s and AAC files and streaming music from Spotify.

The Solo2 sound best, unsurprisingly, when listening to hip-hop, dubstep and electronica. That said, I was pleasantly surprised by how well the headphones managed to sound when listening to some Cat Stevens.

Where the Solo2 didn’t hold up at least compared to the Sony MDR-1R headphones I have at home and the Klipsch Image One headphones, it did great with certain types of rock — particularly with more of a punk twist. The high-tinged guitars and vocals didn’t flow as well as on other less bass-heavy headphones.

For non-musical listening, podcasts, computer sounds, TV — the Solo2 sound just fine.

If you primarily listen to hip-hop, electronica or dubstep — the way the Solo2 are tuned might be perfect.

The Solo2 also has a built-in microphone and playback controls on the cord. It worked well on iOS and on OS X. I made a few phone calls with the microphone and had no complaints about my sound quality. A test recording I did came out comparable to the microphone quality on the Klipsch Image One.

My only real problem with the Solo2 is its price. At $99, these would be an instant-recommendation. For $150, it wouldn’t be out of line against similar size headphones from other vendors.

Beats is in an interesting position because brand awareness and aspirational levels are through the roof, but the company still has to fight back against the sins of its past manufacturing partner. For that reason, I wish the price was $150, if only to help dispel the notion that Beats are overpriced and sound bad.

The truth is, you can get some very nice headphones for $200. To be sure, they won’t be as attractive or fashionable, but they will sound better — especially if you prefer a flat experience.

So the question becomes, how much are you willing to pay for fashion? I for one, am not averse to paying for fashion, provided you understand that that’s what you’re buying going in. For $200, the Sony MDR-1R have superior sound. They’re also larger, don’t fold up as nicely and can’t coordinate with your kicks or your dress.

If your ultimate goal with buying a pair of headphones is to get the best quality for you money, the Solo2 are not for you. However, if you want something that will sound good — especially for hip-hop and dubstep — and look fashionable, the Solo2 fit the bill. Just be aware that a lot of what you’re paying for is the logo and the aesthetic.

Great design • Audio quality is improved from the old models • Sound great for EDM and HipHop

Fit is a little tight • Has some problems with treble • Better sounding headphones are available for $200

Beats Solo2 are a big upgrade from the last generation, but the biggest appeal is still fashion.

Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.

Source: http://mashable.com/2014/05/29/beats-solo-2-review/?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=rss

With Beats, Apple Has Its Next iPod - Webmaster News

New Post has been published on http://www.outils-webmaster.eu/with-beats-apple-has-its-next-ipod/

 

This post reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily those of Mashable as a publication.

Apple on Wednesday confirmed it is buying Beats for $3 billion.

When acquisition talks between Beats and Apple leaked approximately three weeks ago, users and analysts alike expressed confusion over the pairing.

At the Code Conference, Apple’s Eddy Cue talked about what attracted Apple to Beats, focusing on talent, hardware and the Beats Music subscription service.

To be clear, those are all great reasons to buy a company. The thing is, historically speaking, Apple isn’t like most other technology companies when it comes to acquisitions. Unlike Facebook, Google and Microsoft, Apple doesn’t make a habit of spending a few billion dollars on a company or brand. In fact, before Beats, Apple’s biggest acquisition was the 1997 purchase of NeXT for $404 million — and that was as much about getting Steve Jobs and a modern desktop operating system as it was anything else.

Moreover, Apple almost never acquires consumer-facing companies, and when it does, the companies tend to be smaller and on the software side. Again, the last time Apple acquired a hardware company that sold products direct-to-consumer (rather than making semiconductors or flash memory controllers) was also in 1997, when it bought Power Computing Corporation — and that purchase wasn’t to continue to sell Power Computing’s machines, it was to kill the Mac clone program once and for all.

So for Apple to buy a company with an existing (and very strong) brand and two distinct product lines (Beats Music and Beats Electronics) with the intention of keeping the brand and the product lines in operation, the rationale has to be about more than just liking the people and the products.

So what gives? Why is Apple suddenly interested in this company, this brand?

It’s all about creating a new halo product.

Right after the Apple/Beats rumors first leaked, my initial reaction to the news was similar to many others: confusion. The more I thought about it, however, the more similarities I started to see between the two companies.

Then it hit me. Beats headphones are the iconic representation for music for this decade the same way the iPod represented music a decade ago.

After I had this epiphany, I shared my thoughts on Twitter.

Just had a good though in DM that’s worth repeating. Beats in 2014 is what iPod was in 2002 — at least as far as brand goes. Think on it.— Christina Warren (@film_girl) May 9, 2014

The iPod was the device that represented music to an entire generation. That generation became Apple-aware and Apple-brand conscious.— Christina Warren (@film_girl) May 9, 2014

Today, that brand is Beats. It’s what represents music.— Christina Warren (@film_girl) May 9, 2014

A decade ago, white iPod earbuds were a status symbol into themselves. Yes, the earbuds hurt like heck; yes, the sound quality was quite bad — but that white earphone cable meant you had an iPod. And the iPod was the gadget of the decade.

I was an early adopter on the iPod bandwagon, buying a second-generation model the day it was released in September 2002. In a span of 18 months, I went from having to explain to my relatives that no, spending $500 on an MP3 player was not absurd, to seeing white earbuds and iPods everywhere. I went from being one of the only people at my university to have an iPod, to having to make sure I had a sticker or a special case on mine so it wouldn’t get confused with someone else’s at a party or sorority meeting.

I also watched the iPod slowly but surely take over nearly every demographic. Everyone had an iPod. I even got a pink iPod nano for my mom one year for Mother’s Day.

With Beats, I’ve watched the same thing happen. I got my first pair of Beats in late 2008. Initially, I didn’t see many Beats-wearers in public — mostly just online or on the ears of celebrities or athletes. By mid-2010, however, Beats were starting to show up everywhere.

As with the iPod, I also saw the Beats demographic expand. Granted, Beats aren’t as universal and ubiquitous as the iPod — but with newer designs and colors — it’s changing. I got my mom a Fitbit for Mother’s Day this year — but I actually did consider getting her a pair of Beats to go with her iPhone 5S.

In fact, when it comes to cultural iconography, the white earbuds of the iPod have been replaced by the lowercase “b” in the Beats logo. Beats headphones are the gadget/accessory of this decade.

Alright, fine, so instead of spending $300 on an MP3 player as a fashion statement, kids are now spending $300 on headphones. Why does this matter to Apple?

Because of the halo effect. The iPod was an incredibly successful product. Nearly 13 years after the initial launch, it’s easy to take that success for granted, but Apple as we know it was built on the back of the iPod. Yes, the iPhone is the product that catapulted Apple into the stratosphere — but without the success of the iPod, it’s unlikely the iPhone would have ever been able to achieve mass-market visibility, media coverage and consumer interest right out of the gate.

In 2004, when iPod sales really started to take off, Apple also started to sell a lot more Macs. Moreover, most of the sales were not to existing Mac owners, but to first-time Mac buyers — users switching over from Windows. After losing PC marketshare for nearly 18 years, Apple actually started to reverse course.

Analysts attributed the newfound interest in the Mac — especially amongst “switchers” — directly to the success of the iPod. Dubbed the “iPod halo effect,” the theory is that after buying and having such a great experience with the iPod, customers were more open and eager to buy other Apple products — including the Mac.

There was some debate about the validity of the halo effect, but by 2007, it was generally recognized as having a major impact on Apple’s business. In fact, the halo has now shifted from the iPod to the iPhone and even iPad. These are the gateway drugs to Apple addiction.

There’s an important aspect of the halo effect that often gets overlooked however: the generational impact.

In August 2001, just two months before the iPod was released, I started college. Over the summer, I had to make a tortured decision between buying a Mac or a Windows PC for school. The iMac and iBook were great, but Mac OS X 10.0 had just come out the previous spring. It was still buggy and required running the aging Mac OS 9 as an app.

Meanwhile, Windows XP was about to be released and was really good. So despite using Apple products at school — and despite majoring in film — I took a new Windows computer to college. I wasn’t alone. I remember the operating statistics of the network at my university: during my freshmen year, it was 98.5% Windows.

Cut to 2005. I had taken some time off school and when I returned, I was surprised to show up for class to see a wave of glowing Apple logos. In 2006, there were even more. By my last year of school, 2007, there were three Macs for every 1 Windows laptop in a typical lecture.

Nearly overnight, the generation of users that came of age on the iPod started to adopt the Mac en masse. Today, college campuses across America are absolutely overrun by glowing Apple logos. It’s gone from being a rounding error in terms of adoption at my university, to account for over 90% for incoming freshmen.

The dividends of the iPod are still paying off, and Apple is more successful than ever.

There’s just one problem: What is Apple’s current “gateway drug”?

This is the opportunity I see in Beats. There are millions of consumers who are spending $200-$300 on Beats headphones every year. This might just be a fraction of the phones Apple sells, but for many of these users, a pair of Beats is their first high-end premium electronics purchase.

Right now, many Beats buyers don’t use an iPhone. There are no official reports as to the actual breakdown, but in some parts of the world, the majority of Beats owners have Android phones.

The iPod halo effect was particularly powerful because it was able to help create customers and buyers out of an entire generation of users.

Arguably, the smartphone could be that gateway drug and product — and Apple has certainly seen continued halo effects from the iPhone and iPad — but as the smartphone becomes more and more essential, its ability to be a gateway drug dissipates. iPod owners already had a computer before they got an iPod — the halo effect came into play when they went to buy their next purchase.

I see headphones working the same way. The person who buys Beats already has a smartphone. The goal should be to make the experience and the brand so positive that the consumer considers getting and iPhone as her next smartphone.

Moreover, just as iTunes for Windows helped usher hundreds of millions of users into the Apple ecosystem, Beats Music could be iTunes for the streaming age.

That’s even more true if Apple and Beats can offer a good experience to all users on all platforms for streaming music, but a better and easier experience for iOS/Mac users.

The biggest potential I see in the Apple/Beats acquisition isn’t about Apple’s existing customer base, but for the next-generation of would-be Apple customers.

Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.

Source: http://mashable.com/2014/05/29/beats-apple-ipod/?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=rss

Beats Drops Subscription Price After Apple Sale - Webmaster News

New Post has been published on http://www.outils-webmaster.eu/beats-drops-subscription-price-after-apple-sale/

Beats Music has actually just decreased the cost of subscriptions and extended the complimentary trial period for customers to its app.

The price change was part of an update to the company’s iOS and Android app– one that dropped simply hours after Apple verified it was obtaining Beats for $3 billion.

It isn’t clear if the business meant to time the upgrade with the announcement, but the cost drop appears specific to interest possible clients who wonder about the app in the wake of the news. The streaming service only had 11,000 customers in March, according to a current report.

Beats did not right away react to Mashable’s demand to comment.

Annual subscriptions are now $99, below $119.98. The rate for a month-to-month subscription is the same at $9.99. The price for AT&T customers continues to be the exact same, $9.99 a month for people and $14.99 a month for households with a 30-day complimentary trial duration.

The business is likewise extending the free trial duration for all new users– from 7 to 14 days.

Alongside the rate modifications, the most recent version of the iOS app consists of “lots of bug fixes so the whole experience runs smooth as silk.” The app has actually had a number of issues with bugs considering that it presented in January.

Citing an “very high volume of interest,” Beats temporarily stopped adding new members just one day after its launch– when bugs quickly rendered the app unusable for lots of.

UPGRADE, Might 28, 6:43 p.m. PT:A representative for Beats informed Mashable Wednesday’s app updates– consisting of the pricing modifications– were coincidental and unrelated to the acquisition news. The representative said the Windows Phone app would likewise be upgraded quickly.

Have something to contribute to this tale? Share it in the remarks.

Source: http://mashable.com/2014/05/28/beats-drops-subscription-price/?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=rss