One More One More Thing - Apple Unveils AirPods Max

[Commodus]

9 minutes ago, StDragon said:

Brought to you by the same company that makes:

• Pro Stand - $999

• Apple Mac Pro Wheels Kit - $699

• Apple Mac Pro Feet Kit - $299

They will charge a million bucks for anything if there's a market for it. Because it's Apple, and they can. Simple as that.

Nah, it's more complicated than that. Remember, this is also the company that put out a brand new line of computers where the 'base' model is plenty fast for almost every buyer, reducing the real-world price of entry.

 

The Mac Pro gear may be overengineered, but I'd chalk up the pricing more to economies of scale than anything else. The Mac Pro is already a niche product, and Apple is selling accessories that only a subset of Mac Pro owners will want to buy after the fact.

 

As for the AirPods Max... that's a tougher call. We don't know how much the price reflects the real cost of the design, or even how good they sound. Apple could be charging a decent amount for truly great headphones, or it could have blown money on industrial design that isn't worth the cost. I'd say the price will be a roadblock for many people regardless, but there's a difference between "because we can" pricing and aiming at the wrong price target.

[StDragon]

47 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Nah, it's more complicated than that. Remember, this is also the company that put out a brand new line of computers where the 'base' model is plenty fast for almost every buyer, reducing the real-world price of entry.

 

47 minutes ago, Commodus said:

...but there's a difference between "because we can" pricing and aiming at the wrong price target.

 

They're halo products. The fact they're there is more to exude elite exclusivity and premium industrial design (state of the art). IMHO, their new Airpods fall in much the same line.

 

They're selling an image. And why not? Those type of products have huge markup relative to the bill of materials.

[Blademaster91]

1 hour ago, Lord Vile said:

Not that much more expensive than the 1000XM4's and QC35. When you're already spending over £300 on headphones what's the extra? 

They're $250 more than Sony WF1000XM4's which go on sale often for less than $300USD, and have the option of being wired headphones,they fold up nicely and come with a really nice case too. With the extra $250 I could get some IEM's if I wanted something I could take with my phone, or I could buy a nice pair of Sennhiesers and have enough for a DAC.

[Lord Vile]

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

They're $250 more than Sony WF1000XM4's which go on sale often for less than $300USD, and have the option of being wired headphones,they fold up nicely and come with a really nice case too. With the extra $250 I could get some IEM's if I wanted something I could take with my phone, or I could buy a nice pair of Sennhiesers and have enough for a DAC.

But it depends on how well they perform and what features are worth anything to see if they justify the price. If they knock the 1000XM4's out of the park then you could say they're worth it .

[GDRRiley]

5 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

But it depends on how well they perform and what features are worth anything to see if they justify the price. If they knock the 1000XM4's out of the park then you could say they're worth it .

even if they do ((which I really doubt) their 2x cost isn't going to be worth it.

[Blade of Grass]

7 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

even if they do ((which I really doubt) their 2x cost isn't going to be worth it.

Eh, people spend thousands of dollars on headphones that need thousands of dollars of other equipment, so evidently it is quite subjective end of the day

[Lord Vile]

5 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

even if they do ((which I really doubt) their 2x cost isn't going to be worth it.

I currently have 3 pairs of over ear headphones totalling about £700 if I bought them all new. If I could buy these and replace them all it would be worth it. 

[Lord Vile]

2 minutes ago, Blade of Grass said:

Eh, people spend thousands of dollars on headphones that need thousands of dollars of other equipment, so evidently it is quite subjective end of the day

To be fair the audiophile stuff is all wired you can't get wired class sound out of a Bluetooth set. If they can get anywhere close though it'd be interesting. 

[GDRRiley]

7 minutes ago, Blade of Grass said:

Eh, people spend thousands of dollars on headphones that need thousands of dollars of other equipment, so evidently it is quite subjective end of the day

right but that isn't the masses, its another hobby.

[Distinctly Average]

8 hours ago, Vishera said:

Sennheiser smashes them no problem.

Have you tested them side by side? Surely until people have them in hand and tested them we cannot comment on the audio quality whatsoever. They could range from perfection to tinny pond shop rubbish not even having the courtesy to have a jack plug. I actually think they will be very good, and have to be at that price. Apple have quite a winning line in Air pods so I am sure they wouldn't want to mar the brand. Sennheiser have some great products too but there have been some sub par models.

[Distinctly Average]

37 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

To be fair the audiophile stuff is all wired you can't get wired class sound out of a Bluetooth set. If they can get anywhere close though it'd be interesting. 

I would also suggest that many a so called "audiophile" is a high earner middle aged plus man who's hearing is almost certainly not up to telling the difference. We also become used to the qualities of any sound system, so any changes can at first sound bad. It is all very subjective and a lot IMHO is marketing bull. 

 

A prime example of the marketing bull head over heart was a friend of mine, in his late 60s. He has an audiophile setup, he has probably spent over £100k on over the years. He recently upgraded his speaker cables from ones that cost £104 per meter to ones costing £412 per meter. He is convinced they are better so who am I to suggest otherwise. Silly old sod cannot hear an ambulance wailing its siren behind him to get out of the way.

[Lord Vile]

8 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

I would also suggest that many a so called "audiophile" is a high earner middle aged plus man who's hearing is almost certainly not up to telling the difference. We also become used to the qualities of any sound system, so any changes can at first sound bad. It is all very subjective and a lot IMHO is marketing bull. 

 

A prime example of the marketing bull head over heart was a friend of mine, in his late 60s. He has an audiophile setup, he has probably spent over £100k on over the years. He recently upgraded his speaker cables from ones that cost £104 per meter to ones costing £412 per meter. He is convinced they are better so who am I to suggest otherwise. Silly old sod cannot hear an ambulance wailing its siren behind him to get out of the way.

When you get to that point yeah it's diminishing returns but there's a clear difference between the same pair of headphones on wired vs wireless and with my 599s there's a massive difference even between a phone and a PC wired connection. 

[Vishera]

13 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

Have you tested them side by side? Surely until people have them in hand and tested them we cannot comment on the audio quality whatsoever. They could range from perfection to tinny pond shop rubbish not even having the courtesy to have a jack plug. I actually think they will be very good, and have to be at that price. Apple have quite a winning line in Air pods so I am sure they wouldn't want to mar the brand. Sennheiser have some great products too but there have been some sub par models.

 

6 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

I would also suggest that many a so called "audiophile" is a high earner middle aged plus man who's hearing is almost certainly not up to telling the difference. We also become used to the qualities of any sound system, so any changes can at first sound bad. It is all very subjective and a lot IMHO is marketing bull. 

 

A prime example of the marketing bull head over heart was a friend of mine, in his late 60s. He has an audiophile setup, he has probably spent over £100k on over the years. He recently upgraded his speaker cables from ones that cost £104 per meter to ones costing £412 per meter. He is convinced they are better so who am I to suggest otherwise. Silly old sod cannot hear an ambulance wailing its siren behind him to get out of the way.

Sassy

[Commodus]

1 hour ago, StDragon said:

They're halo products. The fact they're there is more to exude elite exclusivity and premium industrial design (state of the art). IMHO, their new Airpods fall in much the same line.

 

They're selling an image. And why not? Those type of products have huge markup relative to the bill of materials.

I won't dispute the halo factor. I just wonder how much of that is baked into the price versus the design. Apple clearly went over the top with the engineering on this one.

[StDragon]

1 hour ago, Commodus said:

I won't dispute the halo factor. I just wonder how much of that is baked into the price versus the design. Apple clearly went over the top with the engineering on this one.

At least with regards to the feet, that looks like nothing more than metal turned on lathe and dipped into a solution for chrome plating. Could easily make a knockoff version for a fraction of the price.

 

Either Apple is selling the feet in low volume as a halo product to justify the high price in initial production, or the market up is of insane profit. I tend to believe the latter.

 

Some perspective: Apple has over 190 BILLION cash on hand with a market value of 2 Trillion! No need to borrow.

 

As of this year, Apple had earnings of 57 BILLION dollars. That more than the GDP production of most smaller nations on the planet. Not that it would make sense to be their own nation and fund their own military. But, the nation of Apple hypothetically could exist if there was an actual government and municipality to fund. That's what you get when you sell products with a large profit margin

[abazigal]

34 minutes ago, StDragon said:

At least with regards to the feet, that looks like nothing more than metal turned on lathe and dipped into a solution for chrome plating. Could easily make a knockoff version for a fraction of the price.

 

Either Apple is selling the feet in low volume as a halo product to justify the high price in initial production, or the market up is of insane profit. I tend to believe the latter.

 

Some perspective: Apple has over 190 BILLION cash on hand with a market value of 2 Trillion! No need to borrow.

 

As of this year, Apple had earnings of 57 BILLION dollars. That more than the GDP production of most smaller nations on the planet. Not that it would make sense to be their own nation and fund their own military. But, the nation of Apple hypothetically could exist if there was an actual government and municipality to fund. That's what you get when you sell products with a large profit margin

I will argue it’s more of the former. 

 

My take is that like the original HomePod, the AirPods max cost a lot to design and manufacture. This is also likely a low-volume product meant to appeal to audio enthusiasts who are not having their meets met with the existing AirPods lineup. 

 

The AirPods max is likely priced from a profit-maximising standpoint. So the profit from each of them probably isn’t that high, and Apple won’t sell that much of them either. Yes, we have the swappable ear cups, which probably fulfil the same role as the Apple Watch bands, but it likely still won’t earn Apple all that much either. 

 

What I am hoping is that just like how we got the HomePod mini, this will eventually pave the way for a more affordable pair of headphones down the line. Yes, the AirPods max is expensive, but I don’t think it’s the blatant money grab people are painting this out to be. 

[shermantanker]

At least they look like a $550 pair of headphones, but damn I wasn’t expecting these to be priced so high.

[Brooksie359]

11 hours ago, vetali said:

Maybe, but the ANC is the variable. Its the reason why I went with airpods pro vs other earbuds with better quality. If the ANC is as good, if not better I have a feeling apple will gain some buyers because of that.

 

That said. 550 bucks is about 200 dollars more than I'd want to spend on these headphones. That price is yikes. Plus I prefer open backs for home listening.

Honestly I have considered the airpod pros for the noise canceling as that would be super useful as earbuds. I typically don't use overear headphones while out in public so I don't think noise canceling overear headphones makes much sense to me. Even then just have overear headphones blocks out alot of noise already. 

[vetali]

34 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Honestly I have considered the airpod pros for the noise canceling as that would be super useful as earbuds. I typically don't use overear headphones while out in public so I don't think noise canceling overear headphones makes much sense to me. Even then just have overear headphones blocks out alot of noise already. 

The ANC is really good. At work we always have detailers going ham with the vacuums and extractors all day. Was giving me headaches. They are whisper quiet with airpods + ANC. Ironically one of the detailers gave me the tip to get airpods pro lol.

[AvMaverick]

AirPods Max are standard Apple behaviour.

1. Slightly modified form factor than the rest of the market, very metallic.

2. Part replacements demand a premium. ($50 Cushions)

3. Highly-priced for the product they are.

4. Tapping into a price-form factor zone never tapped into.

5. Market shockwaves.

[Commodus]

What's wild is how quickly these sold out. Shipping times went from "a week" to 12-14 weeks in the space of several hours. I wouldn't be surprised if supplies were tight, but apparently there really is a big market for $549 Apple-oriented wireless headphones.

 

Of course, it helps that there's a pandemic where people are working from home and suddenly have plenty of opportunitiies to listen to music.

[AlwaysWong]

For that price, i can buy two brand new Bose QuietComfort 35 II. I bet the pro max comfort level is not going to be as good as Bose QC 35 II. 

 

 

[suicidalfranco]

At such a price I'd just grab an HD600. And the day I'll care about Bluetooth i'll just grab one of those bt dac and amp receivers.

For Closed back I'd pick the HD598.

And finally with the left over money some good IEMs.

 

[saltycaramel]

Maybe it’s just me, but at the rate these wearables (apple watch 6, airpods pro, airpods max) are improving and on the other hand at the rate smartphones are plateau-ing, these days it’s better to have a 3 years old smartphone and get the latest shiny wearables (I’m talking in Apple’s ecosystem of course, other wearable ecosystems are amateur hour in comparison and you can keep spending for the latest and more camera-lens-ridden phone)

 

And these cost a fraction of iPhones.

Now put the price in this perspective. 

[Spindel]

10 hours ago, Distinctly Average said:

I would also suggest that many a so called "audiophile" is a high earner middle aged plus man who's hearing is almost certainly not up to telling the difference. We also become used to the qualities of any sound system, so any changes can at first sound bad. It is all very subjective and a lot IMHO is marketing bull. 

Are we talking about the same audiophiles that shun double blind tests, that shows how ful of bullshit audiophiles are?